Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 1 | Deadline Task Scheduling |
| 2 | ------------------------ |
| 3 | |
| 4 | CONTENTS |
| 5 | ======== |
| 6 | |
| 7 | 0. WARNING |
| 8 | 1. Overview |
| 9 | 2. Scheduling algorithm |
| 10 | 3. Scheduling Real-Time Tasks |
| 11 | 4. Bandwidth management |
| 12 | 4.1 System-wide settings |
| 13 | 4.2 Task interface |
| 14 | 4.3 Default behavior |
| 15 | 5. Tasks CPU affinity |
| 16 | 5.1 SCHED_DEADLINE and cpusets HOWTO |
| 17 | 6. Future plans |
Juri Lelli | f580193 | 2014-09-09 10:57:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 18 | A. Test suite |
Juri Lelli | 13924d2 | 2014-09-09 10:57:16 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 19 | B. Minimal main() |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 20 | |
| 21 | |
| 22 | 0. WARNING |
| 23 | ========== |
| 24 | |
| 25 | Fiddling with these settings can result in an unpredictable or even unstable |
| 26 | system behavior. As for -rt (group) scheduling, it is assumed that root users |
| 27 | know what they're doing. |
| 28 | |
| 29 | |
| 30 | 1. Overview |
| 31 | =========== |
| 32 | |
| 33 | The SCHED_DEADLINE policy contained inside the sched_dl scheduling class is |
| 34 | basically an implementation of the Earliest Deadline First (EDF) scheduling |
| 35 | algorithm, augmented with a mechanism (called Constant Bandwidth Server, CBS) |
| 36 | that makes it possible to isolate the behavior of tasks between each other. |
| 37 | |
| 38 | |
| 39 | 2. Scheduling algorithm |
| 40 | ================== |
| 41 | |
| 42 | SCHED_DEADLINE uses three parameters, named "runtime", "period", and |
Luca Abeni | b56bfc6 | 2014-09-09 10:57:14 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 43 | "deadline", to schedule tasks. A SCHED_DEADLINE task should receive |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 44 | "runtime" microseconds of execution time every "period" microseconds, and |
| 45 | these "runtime" microseconds are available within "deadline" microseconds |
| 46 | from the beginning of the period. In order to implement this behaviour, |
| 47 | every time the task wakes up, the scheduler computes a "scheduling deadline" |
| 48 | consistent with the guarantee (using the CBS[2,3] algorithm). Tasks are then |
| 49 | scheduled using EDF[1] on these scheduling deadlines (the task with the |
Luca Abeni | b56bfc6 | 2014-09-09 10:57:14 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 50 | earliest scheduling deadline is selected for execution). Notice that the |
| 51 | task actually receives "runtime" time units within "deadline" if a proper |
| 52 | "admission control" strategy (see Section "4. Bandwidth management") is used |
| 53 | (clearly, if the system is overloaded this guarantee cannot be respected). |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 54 | |
| 55 | Summing up, the CBS[2,3] algorithms assigns scheduling deadlines to tasks so |
| 56 | that each task runs for at most its runtime every period, avoiding any |
| 57 | interference between different tasks (bandwidth isolation), while the EDF[1] |
Luca Abeni | ad67dc3 | 2014-09-09 10:57:12 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 58 | algorithm selects the task with the earliest scheduling deadline as the one |
| 59 | to be executed next. Thanks to this feature, tasks that do not strictly comply |
| 60 | with the "traditional" real-time task model (see Section 3) can effectively |
| 61 | use the new policy. |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 62 | |
| 63 | In more details, the CBS algorithm assigns scheduling deadlines to |
| 64 | tasks in the following way: |
| 65 | |
| 66 | - Each SCHED_DEADLINE task is characterised by the "runtime", |
| 67 | "deadline", and "period" parameters; |
| 68 | |
| 69 | - The state of the task is described by a "scheduling deadline", and |
Luca Abeni | ad67dc3 | 2014-09-09 10:57:12 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 70 | a "remaining runtime". These two parameters are initially set to 0; |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 71 | |
| 72 | - When a SCHED_DEADLINE task wakes up (becomes ready for execution), |
| 73 | the scheduler checks if |
| 74 | |
Luca Abeni | ad67dc3 | 2014-09-09 10:57:12 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 75 | remaining runtime runtime |
| 76 | ---------------------------------- > --------- |
| 77 | scheduling deadline - current time period |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 78 | |
| 79 | then, if the scheduling deadline is smaller than the current time, or |
| 80 | this condition is verified, the scheduling deadline and the |
Luca Abeni | ad67dc3 | 2014-09-09 10:57:12 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 81 | remaining runtime are re-initialised as |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 82 | |
| 83 | scheduling deadline = current time + deadline |
Luca Abeni | ad67dc3 | 2014-09-09 10:57:12 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 84 | remaining runtime = runtime |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 85 | |
Luca Abeni | ad67dc3 | 2014-09-09 10:57:12 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 86 | otherwise, the scheduling deadline and the remaining runtime are |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 87 | left unchanged; |
| 88 | |
| 89 | - When a SCHED_DEADLINE task executes for an amount of time t, its |
Luca Abeni | ad67dc3 | 2014-09-09 10:57:12 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 90 | remaining runtime is decreased as |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 91 | |
Luca Abeni | ad67dc3 | 2014-09-09 10:57:12 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 92 | remaining runtime = remaining runtime - t |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 93 | |
| 94 | (technically, the runtime is decreased at every tick, or when the |
| 95 | task is descheduled / preempted); |
| 96 | |
Luca Abeni | ad67dc3 | 2014-09-09 10:57:12 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 97 | - When the remaining runtime becomes less or equal than 0, the task is |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 98 | said to be "throttled" (also known as "depleted" in real-time literature) |
| 99 | and cannot be scheduled until its scheduling deadline. The "replenishment |
| 100 | time" for this task (see next item) is set to be equal to the current |
| 101 | value of the scheduling deadline; |
| 102 | |
| 103 | - When the current time is equal to the replenishment time of a |
Luca Abeni | ad67dc3 | 2014-09-09 10:57:12 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 104 | throttled task, the scheduling deadline and the remaining runtime are |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 105 | updated as |
| 106 | |
| 107 | scheduling deadline = scheduling deadline + period |
Luca Abeni | ad67dc3 | 2014-09-09 10:57:12 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 108 | remaining runtime = remaining runtime + runtime |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 109 | |
| 110 | |
| 111 | 3. Scheduling Real-Time Tasks |
| 112 | ============================= |
| 113 | |
| 114 | * BIG FAT WARNING ****************************************************** |
| 115 | * |
| 116 | * This section contains a (not-thorough) summary on classical deadline |
| 117 | * scheduling theory, and how it applies to SCHED_DEADLINE. |
| 118 | * The reader can "safely" skip to Section 4 if only interested in seeing |
| 119 | * how the scheduling policy can be used. Anyway, we strongly recommend |
| 120 | * to come back here and continue reading (once the urge for testing is |
| 121 | * satisfied :P) to be sure of fully understanding all technical details. |
| 122 | ************************************************************************ |
| 123 | |
| 124 | There are no limitations on what kind of task can exploit this new |
| 125 | scheduling discipline, even if it must be said that it is particularly |
| 126 | suited for periodic or sporadic real-time tasks that need guarantees on their |
| 127 | timing behavior, e.g., multimedia, streaming, control applications, etc. |
| 128 | |
| 129 | A typical real-time task is composed of a repetition of computation phases |
| 130 | (task instances, or jobs) which are activated on a periodic or sporadic |
| 131 | fashion. |
| 132 | Each job J_j (where J_j is the j^th job of the task) is characterised by an |
| 133 | arrival time r_j (the time when the job starts), an amount of computation |
| 134 | time c_j needed to finish the job, and a job absolute deadline d_j, which |
| 135 | is the time within which the job should be finished. The maximum execution |
| 136 | time max_j{c_j} is called "Worst Case Execution Time" (WCET) for the task. |
| 137 | A real-time task can be periodic with period P if r_{j+1} = r_j + P, or |
| 138 | sporadic with minimum inter-arrival time P is r_{j+1} >= r_j + P. Finally, |
| 139 | d_j = r_j + D, where D is the task's relative deadline. |
Luca Abeni | b56bfc6 | 2014-09-09 10:57:14 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 140 | The utilisation of a real-time task is defined as the ratio between its |
| 141 | WCET and its period (or minimum inter-arrival time), and represents |
| 142 | the fraction of CPU time needed to execute the task. |
| 143 | |
| 144 | If the total utilisation sum_i(WCET_i/P_i) is larger than M (with M equal |
| 145 | to the number of CPUs), then the scheduler is unable to respect all the |
| 146 | deadlines. |
| 147 | Note that total utilisation is defined as the sum of the utilisations |
| 148 | WCET_i/P_i over all the real-time tasks in the system. When considering |
| 149 | multiple real-time tasks, the parameters of the i-th task are indicated |
| 150 | with the "_i" suffix. |
| 151 | Moreover, if the total utilisation is larger than M, then we risk starving |
| 152 | non- real-time tasks by real-time tasks. |
| 153 | If, instead, the total utilisation is smaller than M, then non real-time |
| 154 | tasks will not be starved and the system might be able to respect all the |
| 155 | deadlines. |
| 156 | As a matter of fact, in this case it is possible to provide an upper bound |
| 157 | for tardiness (defined as the maximum between 0 and the difference |
| 158 | between the finishing time of a job and its absolute deadline). |
| 159 | More precisely, it can be proven that using a global EDF scheduler the |
| 160 | maximum tardiness of each task is smaller or equal than |
| 161 | ((M − 1) · WCET_max − WCET_min)/(M − (M − 2) · U_max) + WCET_max |
| 162 | where WCET_max = max_i{WCET_i} is the maximum WCET, WCET_min=min_i{WCET_i} |
| 163 | is the minimum WCET, and U_max = max_i{WCET_i/P_i} is the maximum utilisation. |
| 164 | |
| 165 | If M=1 (uniprocessor system), or in case of partitioned scheduling (each |
| 166 | real-time task is statically assigned to one and only one CPU), it is |
| 167 | possible to formally check if all the deadlines are respected. |
| 168 | If D_i = P_i for all tasks, then EDF is able to respect all the deadlines |
| 169 | of all the tasks executing on a CPU if and only if the total utilisation |
| 170 | of the tasks running on such a CPU is smaller or equal than 1. |
| 171 | If D_i != P_i for some task, then it is possible to define the density of |
| 172 | a task as C_i/min{D_i,T_i}, and EDF is able to respect all the deadlines |
| 173 | of all the tasks running on a CPU if the sum sum_i C_i/min{D_i,T_i} of the |
| 174 | densities of the tasks running on such a CPU is smaller or equal than 1 |
| 175 | (notice that this condition is only sufficient, and not necessary). |
| 176 | |
| 177 | On multiprocessor systems with global EDF scheduling (non partitioned |
| 178 | systems), a sufficient test for schedulability can not be based on the |
| 179 | utilisations (it can be shown that task sets with utilisations slightly |
| 180 | larger than 1 can miss deadlines regardless of the number of CPUs M). |
| 181 | However, as previously stated, enforcing that the total utilisation is smaller |
| 182 | than M is enough to guarantee that non real-time tasks are not starved and |
| 183 | that the tardiness of real-time tasks has an upper bound. |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 184 | |
| 185 | SCHED_DEADLINE can be used to schedule real-time tasks guaranteeing that |
| 186 | the jobs' deadlines of a task are respected. In order to do this, a task |
| 187 | must be scheduled by setting: |
| 188 | |
| 189 | - runtime >= WCET |
| 190 | - deadline = D |
| 191 | - period <= P |
| 192 | |
| 193 | IOW, if runtime >= WCET and if period is >= P, then the scheduling deadlines |
| 194 | and the absolute deadlines (d_j) coincide, so a proper admission control |
| 195 | allows to respect the jobs' absolute deadlines for this task (this is what is |
| 196 | called "hard schedulability property" and is an extension of Lemma 1 of [2]). |
Luca Abeni | ad67dc3 | 2014-09-09 10:57:12 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 197 | Notice that if runtime > deadline the admission control will surely reject |
| 198 | this task, as it is not possible to respect its temporal constraints. |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 199 | |
| 200 | References: |
| 201 | 1 - C. L. Liu and J. W. Layland. Scheduling algorithms for multiprogram- |
| 202 | ming in a hard-real-time environment. Journal of the Association for |
| 203 | Computing Machinery, 20(1), 1973. |
| 204 | 2 - L. Abeni , G. Buttazzo. Integrating Multimedia Applications in Hard |
| 205 | Real-Time Systems. Proceedings of the 19th IEEE Real-time Systems |
| 206 | Symposium, 1998. http://retis.sssup.it/~giorgio/paps/1998/rtss98-cbs.pdf |
| 207 | 3 - L. Abeni. Server Mechanisms for Multimedia Applications. ReTiS Lab |
Luca Abeni | ad67dc3 | 2014-09-09 10:57:12 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 208 | Technical Report. http://disi.unitn.it/~abeni/tr-98-01.pdf |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 209 | |
| 210 | 4. Bandwidth management |
| 211 | ======================= |
| 212 | |
Luca Abeni | b56bfc6 | 2014-09-09 10:57:14 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 213 | As previously mentioned, in order for -deadline scheduling to be |
| 214 | effective and useful (that is, to be able to provide "runtime" time units |
| 215 | within "deadline"), it is important to have some method to keep the allocation |
| 216 | of the available fractions of CPU time to the various tasks under control. |
| 217 | This is usually called "admission control" and if it is not performed, then |
| 218 | no guarantee can be given on the actual scheduling of the -deadline tasks. |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 219 | |
Luca Abeni | b56bfc6 | 2014-09-09 10:57:14 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 220 | As already stated in Section 3, a necessary condition to be respected to |
| 221 | correctly schedule a set of real-time tasks is that the total utilisation |
| 222 | is smaller than M. When talking about -deadline tasks, this requires that |
| 223 | the sum of the ratio between runtime and period for all tasks is smaller |
| 224 | than M. Notice that the ratio runtime/period is equivalent to the utilisation |
| 225 | of a "traditional" real-time task, and is also often referred to as |
| 226 | "bandwidth". |
| 227 | The interface used to control the CPU bandwidth that can be allocated |
| 228 | to -deadline tasks is similar to the one already used for -rt |
Juri Lelli | 0d9ba8b | 2014-09-09 10:57:13 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 229 | tasks with real-time group scheduling (a.k.a. RT-throttling - see |
| 230 | Documentation/scheduler/sched-rt-group.txt), and is based on readable/ |
| 231 | writable control files located in procfs (for system wide settings). |
| 232 | Notice that per-group settings (controlled through cgroupfs) are still not |
| 233 | defined for -deadline tasks, because more discussion is needed in order to |
| 234 | figure out how we want to manage SCHED_DEADLINE bandwidth at the task group |
| 235 | level. |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 236 | |
Juri Lelli | 0d9ba8b | 2014-09-09 10:57:13 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 237 | A main difference between deadline bandwidth management and RT-throttling |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 238 | is that -deadline tasks have bandwidth on their own (while -rt ones don't!), |
Juri Lelli | 0d9ba8b | 2014-09-09 10:57:13 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 239 | and thus we don't need a higher level throttling mechanism to enforce the |
Luca Abeni | b56bfc6 | 2014-09-09 10:57:14 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 240 | desired bandwidth. In other words, this means that interface parameters are |
| 241 | only used at admission control time (i.e., when the user calls |
| 242 | sched_setattr()). Scheduling is then performed considering actual tasks' |
| 243 | parameters, so that CPU bandwidth is allocated to SCHED_DEADLINE tasks |
| 244 | respecting their needs in terms of granularity. Therefore, using this simple |
| 245 | interface we can put a cap on total utilization of -deadline tasks (i.e., |
| 246 | \Sum (runtime_i / period_i) < global_dl_utilization_cap). |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 247 | |
| 248 | 4.1 System wide settings |
| 249 | ------------------------ |
| 250 | |
| 251 | The system wide settings are configured under the /proc virtual file system. |
| 252 | |
Juri Lelli | 0d9ba8b | 2014-09-09 10:57:13 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 253 | For now the -rt knobs are used for -deadline admission control and the |
| 254 | -deadline runtime is accounted against the -rt runtime. We realise that this |
| 255 | isn't entirely desirable; however, it is better to have a small interface for |
| 256 | now, and be able to change it easily later. The ideal situation (see 5.) is to |
| 257 | run -rt tasks from a -deadline server; in which case the -rt bandwidth is a |
| 258 | direct subset of dl_bw. |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 259 | |
| 260 | This means that, for a root_domain comprising M CPUs, -deadline tasks |
| 261 | can be created while the sum of their bandwidths stays below: |
| 262 | |
| 263 | M * (sched_rt_runtime_us / sched_rt_period_us) |
| 264 | |
| 265 | It is also possible to disable this bandwidth management logic, and |
| 266 | be thus free of oversubscribing the system up to any arbitrary level. |
| 267 | This is done by writing -1 in /proc/sys/kernel/sched_rt_runtime_us. |
| 268 | |
| 269 | |
| 270 | 4.2 Task interface |
| 271 | ------------------ |
| 272 | |
| 273 | Specifying a periodic/sporadic task that executes for a given amount of |
| 274 | runtime at each instance, and that is scheduled according to the urgency of |
| 275 | its own timing constraints needs, in general, a way of declaring: |
| 276 | - a (maximum/typical) instance execution time, |
| 277 | - a minimum interval between consecutive instances, |
| 278 | - a time constraint by which each instance must be completed. |
| 279 | |
| 280 | Therefore: |
| 281 | * a new struct sched_attr, containing all the necessary fields is |
| 282 | provided; |
| 283 | * the new scheduling related syscalls that manipulate it, i.e., |
| 284 | sched_setattr() and sched_getattr() are implemented. |
| 285 | |
| 286 | |
| 287 | 4.3 Default behavior |
| 288 | --------------------- |
| 289 | |
| 290 | The default value for SCHED_DEADLINE bandwidth is to have rt_runtime equal to |
| 291 | 950000. With rt_period equal to 1000000, by default, it means that -deadline |
| 292 | tasks can use at most 95%, multiplied by the number of CPUs that compose the |
| 293 | root_domain, for each root_domain. |
Luca Abeni | b56bfc6 | 2014-09-09 10:57:14 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 294 | This means that non -deadline tasks will receive at least 5% of the CPU time, |
| 295 | and that -deadline tasks will receive their runtime with a guaranteed |
| 296 | worst-case delay respect to the "deadline" parameter. If "deadline" = "period" |
| 297 | and the cpuset mechanism is used to implement partitioned scheduling (see |
| 298 | Section 5), then this simple setting of the bandwidth management is able to |
| 299 | deterministically guarantee that -deadline tasks will receive their runtime |
| 300 | in a period. |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 301 | |
Luca Abeni | b56bfc6 | 2014-09-09 10:57:14 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 302 | Finally, notice that in order not to jeopardize the admission control a |
| 303 | -deadline task cannot fork. |
Dario Faggioli | 712e5e3 | 2014-01-27 12:20:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 304 | |
| 305 | 5. Tasks CPU affinity |
| 306 | ===================== |
| 307 | |
| 308 | -deadline tasks cannot have an affinity mask smaller that the entire |
| 309 | root_domain they are created on. However, affinities can be specified |
| 310 | through the cpuset facility (Documentation/cgroups/cpusets.txt). |
| 311 | |
| 312 | 5.1 SCHED_DEADLINE and cpusets HOWTO |
| 313 | ------------------------------------ |
| 314 | |
| 315 | An example of a simple configuration (pin a -deadline task to CPU0) |
| 316 | follows (rt-app is used to create a -deadline task). |
| 317 | |
| 318 | mkdir /dev/cpuset |
| 319 | mount -t cgroup -o cpuset cpuset /dev/cpuset |
| 320 | cd /dev/cpuset |
| 321 | mkdir cpu0 |
| 322 | echo 0 > cpu0/cpuset.cpus |
| 323 | echo 0 > cpu0/cpuset.mems |
| 324 | echo 1 > cpuset.cpu_exclusive |
| 325 | echo 0 > cpuset.sched_load_balance |
| 326 | echo 1 > cpu0/cpuset.cpu_exclusive |
| 327 | echo 1 > cpu0/cpuset.mem_exclusive |
| 328 | echo $$ > cpu0/tasks |
| 329 | rt-app -t 100000:10000:d:0 -D5 (it is now actually superfluous to specify |
| 330 | task affinity) |
| 331 | |
| 332 | 6. Future plans |
| 333 | =============== |
| 334 | |
| 335 | Still missing: |
| 336 | |
| 337 | - refinements to deadline inheritance, especially regarding the possibility |
| 338 | of retaining bandwidth isolation among non-interacting tasks. This is |
| 339 | being studied from both theoretical and practical points of view, and |
| 340 | hopefully we should be able to produce some demonstrative code soon; |
| 341 | - (c)group based bandwidth management, and maybe scheduling; |
| 342 | - access control for non-root users (and related security concerns to |
| 343 | address), which is the best way to allow unprivileged use of the mechanisms |
| 344 | and how to prevent non-root users "cheat" the system? |
| 345 | |
| 346 | As already discussed, we are planning also to merge this work with the EDF |
| 347 | throttling patches [https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/23/239] but we still are in |
| 348 | the preliminary phases of the merge and we really seek feedback that would |
| 349 | help us decide on the direction it should take. |
Juri Lelli | f580193 | 2014-09-09 10:57:15 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 350 | |
| 351 | Appendix A. Test suite |
| 352 | ====================== |
| 353 | |
| 354 | The SCHED_DEADLINE policy can be easily tested using two applications that |
| 355 | are part of a wider Linux Scheduler validation suite. The suite is |
| 356 | available as a GitHub repository: https://github.com/scheduler-tools. |
| 357 | |
| 358 | The first testing application is called rt-app and can be used to |
| 359 | start multiple threads with specific parameters. rt-app supports |
| 360 | SCHED_{OTHER,FIFO,RR,DEADLINE} scheduling policies and their related |
| 361 | parameters (e.g., niceness, priority, runtime/deadline/period). rt-app |
| 362 | is a valuable tool, as it can be used to synthetically recreate certain |
| 363 | workloads (maybe mimicking real use-cases) and evaluate how the scheduler |
| 364 | behaves under such workloads. In this way, results are easily reproducible. |
| 365 | rt-app is available at: https://github.com/scheduler-tools/rt-app. |
| 366 | |
| 367 | Thread parameters can be specified from the command line, with something like |
| 368 | this: |
| 369 | |
| 370 | # rt-app -t 100000:10000:d -t 150000:20000:f:10 -D5 |
| 371 | |
| 372 | The above creates 2 threads. The first one, scheduled by SCHED_DEADLINE, |
| 373 | executes for 10ms every 100ms. The second one, scheduled at SCHED_FIFO |
| 374 | priority 10, executes for 20ms every 150ms. The test will run for a total |
| 375 | of 5 seconds. |
| 376 | |
| 377 | More interestingly, configurations can be described with a json file that |
| 378 | can be passed as input to rt-app with something like this: |
| 379 | |
| 380 | # rt-app my_config.json |
| 381 | |
| 382 | The parameters that can be specified with the second method are a superset |
| 383 | of the command line options. Please refer to rt-app documentation for more |
| 384 | details (<rt-app-sources>/doc/*.json). |
| 385 | |
| 386 | The second testing application is a modification of schedtool, called |
| 387 | schedtool-dl, which can be used to setup SCHED_DEADLINE parameters for a |
| 388 | certain pid/application. schedtool-dl is available at: |
| 389 | https://github.com/scheduler-tools/schedtool-dl.git. |
| 390 | |
| 391 | The usage is straightforward: |
| 392 | |
| 393 | # schedtool -E -t 10000000:100000000 -e ./my_cpuhog_app |
| 394 | |
| 395 | With this, my_cpuhog_app is put to run inside a SCHED_DEADLINE reservation |
| 396 | of 10ms every 100ms (note that parameters are expressed in microseconds). |
| 397 | You can also use schedtool to create a reservation for an already running |
| 398 | application, given that you know its pid: |
| 399 | |
| 400 | # schedtool -E -t 10000000:100000000 my_app_pid |
Juri Lelli | 13924d2 | 2014-09-09 10:57:16 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 401 | |
| 402 | Appendix B. Minimal main() |
| 403 | ========================== |
| 404 | |
| 405 | We provide in what follows a simple (ugly) self-contained code snippet |
| 406 | showing how SCHED_DEADLINE reservations can be created by a real-time |
| 407 | application developer. |
| 408 | |
| 409 | #define _GNU_SOURCE |
| 410 | #include <unistd.h> |
| 411 | #include <stdio.h> |
| 412 | #include <stdlib.h> |
| 413 | #include <string.h> |
| 414 | #include <time.h> |
| 415 | #include <linux/unistd.h> |
| 416 | #include <linux/kernel.h> |
| 417 | #include <linux/types.h> |
| 418 | #include <sys/syscall.h> |
| 419 | #include <pthread.h> |
| 420 | |
| 421 | #define gettid() syscall(__NR_gettid) |
| 422 | |
| 423 | #define SCHED_DEADLINE 6 |
| 424 | |
| 425 | /* XXX use the proper syscall numbers */ |
| 426 | #ifdef __x86_64__ |
| 427 | #define __NR_sched_setattr 314 |
| 428 | #define __NR_sched_getattr 315 |
| 429 | #endif |
| 430 | |
| 431 | #ifdef __i386__ |
| 432 | #define __NR_sched_setattr 351 |
| 433 | #define __NR_sched_getattr 352 |
| 434 | #endif |
| 435 | |
| 436 | #ifdef __arm__ |
| 437 | #define __NR_sched_setattr 380 |
| 438 | #define __NR_sched_getattr 381 |
| 439 | #endif |
| 440 | |
| 441 | static volatile int done; |
| 442 | |
| 443 | struct sched_attr { |
| 444 | __u32 size; |
| 445 | |
| 446 | __u32 sched_policy; |
| 447 | __u64 sched_flags; |
| 448 | |
| 449 | /* SCHED_NORMAL, SCHED_BATCH */ |
| 450 | __s32 sched_nice; |
| 451 | |
| 452 | /* SCHED_FIFO, SCHED_RR */ |
| 453 | __u32 sched_priority; |
| 454 | |
| 455 | /* SCHED_DEADLINE (nsec) */ |
| 456 | __u64 sched_runtime; |
| 457 | __u64 sched_deadline; |
| 458 | __u64 sched_period; |
| 459 | }; |
| 460 | |
| 461 | int sched_setattr(pid_t pid, |
| 462 | const struct sched_attr *attr, |
| 463 | unsigned int flags) |
| 464 | { |
| 465 | return syscall(__NR_sched_setattr, pid, attr, flags); |
| 466 | } |
| 467 | |
| 468 | int sched_getattr(pid_t pid, |
| 469 | struct sched_attr *attr, |
| 470 | unsigned int size, |
| 471 | unsigned int flags) |
| 472 | { |
| 473 | return syscall(__NR_sched_getattr, pid, attr, size, flags); |
| 474 | } |
| 475 | |
| 476 | void *run_deadline(void *data) |
| 477 | { |
| 478 | struct sched_attr attr; |
| 479 | int x = 0; |
| 480 | int ret; |
| 481 | unsigned int flags = 0; |
| 482 | |
| 483 | printf("deadline thread started [%ld]\n", gettid()); |
| 484 | |
| 485 | attr.size = sizeof(attr); |
| 486 | attr.sched_flags = 0; |
| 487 | attr.sched_nice = 0; |
| 488 | attr.sched_priority = 0; |
| 489 | |
| 490 | /* This creates a 10ms/30ms reservation */ |
| 491 | attr.sched_policy = SCHED_DEADLINE; |
| 492 | attr.sched_runtime = 10 * 1000 * 1000; |
| 493 | attr.sched_period = attr.sched_deadline = 30 * 1000 * 1000; |
| 494 | |
| 495 | ret = sched_setattr(0, &attr, flags); |
| 496 | if (ret < 0) { |
| 497 | done = 0; |
| 498 | perror("sched_setattr"); |
| 499 | exit(-1); |
| 500 | } |
| 501 | |
| 502 | while (!done) { |
| 503 | x++; |
| 504 | } |
| 505 | |
| 506 | printf("deadline thread dies [%ld]\n", gettid()); |
| 507 | return NULL; |
| 508 | } |
| 509 | |
| 510 | int main (int argc, char **argv) |
| 511 | { |
| 512 | pthread_t thread; |
| 513 | |
| 514 | printf("main thread [%ld]\n", gettid()); |
| 515 | |
| 516 | pthread_create(&thread, NULL, run_deadline, NULL); |
| 517 | |
| 518 | sleep(10); |
| 519 | |
| 520 | done = 1; |
| 521 | pthread_join(thread, NULL); |
| 522 | |
| 523 | printf("main dies [%ld]\n", gettid()); |
| 524 | return 0; |
| 525 | } |