|
@@ -165,39 +165,38 @@ CONTENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
In order for the -deadline scheduling to be effective and useful, it is
|
|
|
important to have some method to keep the allocation of the available CPU
|
|
|
- bandwidth to the tasks under control.
|
|
|
- This is usually called "admission control" and if it is not performed at all,
|
|
|
- no guarantee can be given on the actual scheduling of the -deadline tasks.
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
- Since when RT-throttling has been introduced each task group has a bandwidth
|
|
|
- associated, calculated as a certain amount of runtime over a period.
|
|
|
- Moreover, to make it possible to manipulate such bandwidth, readable/writable
|
|
|
- controls have been added to both procfs (for system wide settings) and cgroupfs
|
|
|
- (for per-group settings).
|
|
|
- Therefore, the same interface is being used for controlling the bandwidth
|
|
|
- distrubution to -deadline tasks.
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
- However, more discussion is needed in order to figure out how we want to manage
|
|
|
- SCHED_DEADLINE bandwidth at the task group level. Therefore, SCHED_DEADLINE
|
|
|
- uses (for now) a less sophisticated, but actually very sensible, mechanism to
|
|
|
- ensure that a certain utilization cap is not overcome per each root_domain.
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
- Another main difference between deadline bandwidth management and RT-throttling
|
|
|
+ bandwidth to the tasks under control. This is usually called "admission
|
|
|
+ control" and if it is not performed at all, no guarantee can be given on
|
|
|
+ the actual scheduling of the -deadline tasks.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ The interface used to control the fraction of CPU bandwidth that can be
|
|
|
+ allocated to -deadline tasks is similar to the one already used for -rt
|
|
|
+ tasks with real-time group scheduling (a.k.a. RT-throttling - see
|
|
|
+ Documentation/scheduler/sched-rt-group.txt), and is based on readable/
|
|
|
+ writable control files located in procfs (for system wide settings).
|
|
|
+ Notice that per-group settings (controlled through cgroupfs) are still not
|
|
|
+ defined for -deadline tasks, because more discussion is needed in order to
|
|
|
+ figure out how we want to manage SCHED_DEADLINE bandwidth at the task group
|
|
|
+ level.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ A main difference between deadline bandwidth management and RT-throttling
|
|
|
is that -deadline tasks have bandwidth on their own (while -rt ones don't!),
|
|
|
- and thus we don't need an higher level throttling mechanism to enforce the
|
|
|
- desired bandwidth.
|
|
|
+ and thus we don't need a higher level throttling mechanism to enforce the
|
|
|
+ desired bandwidth. Therefore, using this simple interface we can put a cap
|
|
|
+ on total utilization of -deadline tasks (i.e., \Sum (runtime_i / period_i) <
|
|
|
+ global_dl_utilization_cap).
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.1 System wide settings
|
|
|
------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
The system wide settings are configured under the /proc virtual file system.
|
|
|
|
|
|
- For now the -rt knobs are used for dl admission control and the -deadline
|
|
|
- runtime is accounted against the -rt runtime. We realise that this isn't
|
|
|
- entirely desirable; however, it is better to have a small interface for now,
|
|
|
- and be able to change it easily later. The ideal situation (see 5.) is to run
|
|
|
- -rt tasks from a -deadline server; in which case the -rt bandwidth is a direct
|
|
|
- subset of dl_bw.
|
|
|
+ For now the -rt knobs are used for -deadline admission control and the
|
|
|
+ -deadline runtime is accounted against the -rt runtime. We realise that this
|
|
|
+ isn't entirely desirable; however, it is better to have a small interface for
|
|
|
+ now, and be able to change it easily later. The ideal situation (see 5.) is to
|
|
|
+ run -rt tasks from a -deadline server; in which case the -rt bandwidth is a
|
|
|
+ direct subset of dl_bw.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This means that, for a root_domain comprising M CPUs, -deadline tasks
|
|
|
can be created while the sum of their bandwidths stays below:
|