From: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
Steve Muckle <smuckle@google.com>, Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: util_est: add running_sum tracking
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 12:33:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180605193317.GA239272@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180605152156.GD32302@e110439-lin>
On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 04:21:56PM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
[..]
> > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > > index f74441be3f44..5d54d6a4c31f 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > > @@ -3161,6 +3161,8 @@ accumulate_sum(u64 delta, int cpu, struct sched_avg *sa,
> > > sa->runnable_load_sum =
> > > decay_load(sa->runnable_load_sum, periods);
> > > sa->util_sum = decay_load((u64)(sa->util_sum), periods);
> > > + if (running)
> > > + sa->running_sum = decay_load(sa->running_sum, periods);
> > >
> > > /*
> > > * Step 2
> > > @@ -3176,8 +3178,10 @@ accumulate_sum(u64 delta, int cpu, struct sched_avg *sa,
> > > sa->load_sum += load * contrib;
> > > if (runnable)
> > > sa->runnable_load_sum += runnable * contrib;
> > > - if (running)
> > > + if (running) {
> > > sa->util_sum += contrib * scale_cpu;
> > > + sa->running_sum += contrib * scale_cpu;
> > > + }
> > >
> > > return periods;
> > > }
> > > @@ -3963,6 +3967,12 @@ static inline void util_est_enqueue(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq,
> > > WRITE_ONCE(cfs_rq->avg.util_est.enqueued, enqueued);
> > > }
> >
> > PELT changes look nice and makes sense :)
>
> That's not strictly speaking a PELT change... it's still more in the
> idea to work "on top of PELT" to make it more effective in measuring
> the tasks expected required CPU bandwidth.
I meant "PELT change" as in change to the code that calculates PELT signals..
> > > +static inline void util_est_enqueue_running(struct task_struct *p)
> > > +{
> > > + /* Initilize the (non-preempted) utilization */
> > > + p->se.avg.running_sum = p->se.avg.util_sum;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > /*
> > > * Check if a (signed) value is within a specified (unsigned) margin,
> > > * based on the observation that:
> > > @@ -4018,7 +4028,7 @@ util_est_dequeue(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct task_struct *p, bool task_sleep)
> > > * Skip update of task's estimated utilization when its EWMA is
> > > * already ~1% close to its last activation value.
> > > */
> > > - ue.enqueued = (task_util(p) | UTIL_AVG_UNCHANGED);
> > > + ue.enqueued = p->se.avg.running_sum / LOAD_AVG_MAX;
> >
> > I guess we are doing extra division here which adds some cost. Does
> > performance look Ok with the change?
>
> This extra division is there and done only at dequeue time instead of
> doing it at each update_load_avg.
I know. :)
> To be more precise, at each ___update_load_avg we should really update
> running_avg by:
>
> u32 divider = LOAD_AVG_MAX - 1024 + sa->period_contrib;
> sa->running_avg = sa->running_sum / divider;
>
> but, this would imply tracking an additional signal in sched_avg and
> doing an additional division at ___update_load_avg() time.
>
> Morten suggested that, if we accept the rounding errors due to
> considering
>
> divider ~= LOAD_AVG_MAX
>
> thus discarding the (sa->period_contrib - 1024) correction, then we
> can completely skip the tracking of running_avg (thus saving space in
> sched_avg) and approximate it at dequeue time as per the code line,
> just to compute the new util_est sample to accumulate.
>
> Does that make sense now?
The patch always made sense to me.. I was just pointing out the extra
division this patch adds. I agree since its done on dequeue-only, then its
probably Ok to do..
thanks,
- Joel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-05 19:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-04 16:05 [PATCH 0/2] Improve estimated utilization of preempted FAIR tasks Patrick Bellasi
2018-06-04 16:05 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched/fair: pelt: use u32 for util_avg Patrick Bellasi
2018-06-05 1:30 ` kbuild test robot
2018-06-05 1:34 ` kbuild test robot
2018-06-04 16:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: util_est: add running_sum tracking Patrick Bellasi
2018-06-04 17:46 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-06-05 15:21 ` Patrick Bellasi
2018-06-05 19:33 ` Joel Fernandes [this message]
2018-06-05 19:43 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-06-05 1:29 ` kbuild test robot
2018-06-05 6:57 ` Vincent Guittot
2018-06-05 15:11 ` Patrick Bellasi
2018-06-05 15:31 ` Juri Lelli
2018-06-05 16:54 ` Patrick Bellasi
2018-06-05 20:46 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-06-05 23:15 ` Saravana Kannan
2018-06-06 8:26 ` Vincent Guittot
2018-06-06 10:38 ` Patrick Bellasi
2018-06-05 10:46 ` kbuild test robot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180605193317.GA239272@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com \
--to=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=joelaf@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=patrick.bellasi@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=smuckle@google.com \
--cc=tkjos@google.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).