HackerPapers

arXiv:2609.02052cs.OS

SchedBlame: Who Ran While You Waited? Culprit-Attributed CPU Contention for Containers on Stock Kernels

Hao Li, Tonghao Zhang, Honglei Wang

HN submission. Found in a submission link or body. Submitters do not count as commenters in the main ranking; a submission is not an endorsement.

Abstract

Containers that share a machine compete for CPU. When one slows down, the operator needs to know which co-tenant is responsible, and no deployed signal can say. Pressure stall information, per-cgroup wait counters, and run-queue latency histograms are all victim-side: they report that a container waited, never who it waited for. Recovering the culprit means a kernel patch, full scheduler tracing, or statistical inference: unportable, too costly to leave on, or unreliable when victims coexist. SchedBlame is an eBPF tracer that attributes CPU contention to the cgroups that caused it, on stock kernels, continuously. It inverts the accounting: instead of measuring how long a victim waited, it measures the CPU time every other cgroup consumed while that victim was runnable but not running on the same CPU. The mechanism is a per-CPU bitmap of which measured cgroups are waiting, maintained from the kernel's own runnable counts at four scheduler hooks. Every run slice carries that bitmap, so one 16-byte record charges CPU time to a full row of a competitor x victim blame matrix; the kernel stores no per-pair state. Three properties follow. Slices are self-describing, so userspace holds no waiting state and a lost record costs measurements, not correctness. The measured set is reconfigured by publishing an epoch, invalidating every cache and per-CPU bitmap in constant time while the hooks keep running. Sampling never touches waiting state, so rescaling by the inverse keep probability keeps the estimator unbiased. SchedBlame splits each container's per-second CPU demand into runtime, internal contention, external contention, and throttling, flags anomalies against a rolling 99th-percentile baseline, and names the competitors responsible. In production on unmodified 4.18 and 5.10 kernels, tracking 84 containers on a 96-core host, it costs about 1% of Redis throughput and 6% of one core.

arXiv comments
12 pages, 2 figures. Preliminary evaluation; a full evaluation plan is stated in the paper
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
cs.OSOperating Systems cs.PFPerformance

On Hacker News

No comments linking this paper were found in the collected sources. Found in 1 HN submission from Sep 2026 to Sep 2026. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments0 threads

No comments linking this paper were found in the collected sources. Open submission discussions.

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.