Return to sched-nice-design.txt CVS log

Up to [Development] / linux-2.6-xfs / Documentation

Update 2.6.x-xfs to 2.6.23-rc4.

Also update fs/xfs with external mainline changes.
There were 12 such missing commits that I detected:

--------
commit ad690ef9e690f6c31f7d310b09ef1314bcec9033
Author: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
    xfs ioctl __user annotations

commit 20c2df83d25c6a95affe6157a4c9cac4cf5ffaac
Author: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
    mm: Remove slab destructors from kmem_cache_create().

commit d0217ac04ca6591841e5665f518e38064f4e65bd
Author: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
    mm: fault feedback #1

commit 54cb8821de07f2ffcd28c380ce9b93d5784b40d7
Author: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
    mm: merge populate and nopage into fault (fixes nonlinear)

commit d00806b183152af6d24f46f0c33f14162ca1262a
Author: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
    mm: fix fault vs invalidate race for linear mappings

commit a569425512253992cc64ebf8b6d00a62f986db3e
Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
    knfsd: exportfs: add exportfs.h header

commit 831441862956fffa17b9801db37e6ea1650b0f69
Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
    Freezer: make kernel threads nonfreezable by default

commit 8e1f936b73150f5095448a0fee6d4f30a1f9001d
Author: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
    mm: clean up and kernelify shrinker registration

commit 5ffc4ef45b3b0a57872f631b4e4ceb8ace0d7496
Author: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
    sendfile: remove .sendfile from filesystems that use generic_file_sendfile()

commit 8bb7844286fb8c9fce6f65d8288aeb09d03a5e0d
Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
    Add suspend-related notifications for CPU hotplug

commit 59c51591a0ac7568824f541f57de967e88adaa07
Author: Michael Opdenacker <michael@free-electrons.com>
    Fix occurrences of "the the "

commit 0ceb331433e8aad9c5f441a965d7c681f8b9046f
Author: Dmitriy Monakhov <dmonakhov@openvz.org>
    mm: move common segment checks to separate helper function
--------
Merge of 2.6.x-xfs-melb:linux:29656b by kenmcd.

This document explains the thinking about the revamped and streamlined
nice-levels implementation in the new Linux scheduler.

Nice levels were always pretty weak under Linux and people continuously
pestered us to make nice +19 tasks use up much less CPU time.

Unfortunately that was not that easy to implement under the old
scheduler, (otherwise we'd have done it long ago) because nice level
support was historically coupled to timeslice length, and timeslice
units were driven by the HZ tick, so the smallest timeslice was 1/HZ.

In the O(1) scheduler (in 2003) we changed negative nice levels to be
much stronger than they were before in 2.4 (and people were happy about
that change), and we also intentionally calibrated the linear timeslice
rule so that nice +19 level would be _exactly_ 1 jiffy. To better
understand it, the timeslice graph went like this (cheesy ASCII art
alert!):


                   A
             \     | [timeslice length]
              \    |
               \   |
                \  |
                 \ |
                  \|___100msecs
                   |^ . _
                   |      ^ . _
                   |            ^ . _
 -*----------------------------------*-----> [nice level]
 -20               |                +19
                   |
                   |

So that if someone wanted to really renice tasks, +19 would give a much
bigger hit than the normal linear rule would do. (The solution of
changing the ABI to extend priorities was discarded early on.)

This approach worked to some degree for some time, but later on with
HZ=1000 it caused 1 jiffy to be 1 msec, which meant 0.1% CPU usage which
we felt to be a bit excessive. Excessive _not_ because it's too small of
a CPU utilization, but because it causes too frequent (once per
millisec) rescheduling. (and would thus trash the cache, etc. Remember,
this was long ago when hardware was weaker and caches were smaller, and
people were running number crunching apps at nice +19.)

So for HZ=1000 we changed nice +19 to 5msecs, because that felt like the
right minimal granularity - and this translates to 5% CPU utilization.
But the fundamental HZ-sensitive property for nice+19 still remained,
and we never got a single complaint about nice +19 being too _weak_ in
terms of CPU utilization, we only got complaints about it (still) being
too _strong_ :-)

To sum it up: we always wanted to make nice levels more consistent, but
within the constraints of HZ and jiffies and their nasty design level
coupling to timeslices and granularity it was not really viable.

The second (less frequent but still periodically occuring) complaint
about Linux's nice level support was its assymetry around the origo
(which you can see demonstrated in the picture above), or more
accurately: the fact that nice level behavior depended on the _absolute_
nice level as well, while the nice API itself is fundamentally
"relative":

   int nice(int inc);

   asmlinkage long sys_nice(int increment)

(the first one is the glibc API, the second one is the syscall API.)
Note that the 'inc' is relative to the current nice level. Tools like
bash's "nice" command mirror this relative API.

With the old scheduler, if you for example started a niced task with +1
and another task with +2, the CPU split between the two tasks would
depend on the nice level of the parent shell - if it was at nice -10 the
CPU split was different than if it was at +5 or +10.

A third complaint against Linux's nice level support was that negative
nice levels were not 'punchy enough', so lots of people had to resort to
run audio (and other multimedia) apps under RT priorities such as
SCHED_FIFO. But this caused other problems: SCHED_FIFO is not starvation
proof, and a buggy SCHED_FIFO app can also lock up the system for good.

The new scheduler in v2.6.23 addresses all three types of complaints:

To address the first complaint (of nice levels being not "punchy"
enough), the scheduler was decoupled from 'time slice' and HZ concepts
(and granularity was made a separate concept from nice levels) and thus
it was possible to implement better and more consistent nice +19
support: with the new scheduler nice +19 tasks get a HZ-independent
1.5%, instead of the variable 3%-5%-9% range they got in the old
scheduler.

To address the second complaint (of nice levels not being consistent),
the new scheduler makes nice(1) have the same CPU utilization effect on
tasks, regardless of their absolute nice levels. So on the new
scheduler, running a nice +10 and a nice 11 task has the same CPU
utilization "split" between them as running a nice -5 and a nice -4
task. (one will get 55% of the CPU, the other 45%.) That is why nice
levels were changed to be "multiplicative" (or exponential) - that way
it does not matter which nice level you start out from, the 'relative
result' will always be the same.

The third complaint (of negative nice levels not being "punchy" enough
and forcing audio apps to run under the more dangerous SCHED_FIFO
scheduling policy) is addressed by the new scheduler almost
automatically: stronger negative nice levels are an automatic
side-effect of the recalibrated dynamic range of nice levels.