From: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>
To: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@huawei.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: yangyicong@hisilicon.com, Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>,
Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] sched/fair: ignore SIS_UTIL when has idle core
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2022 14:58:59 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4dde05be-8470-5984-0a30-ba077b9fe6bd@bytedance.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8e7d75d4-613e-f35e-e932-323789666fb1@huawei.com>
On 7/14/22 2:19 PM, Yicong Yang Wrote:
> On 2022/7/12 16:20, Abel Wu wrote:
>> When SIS_UTIL is enabled, SIS domain scan will be skipped if
>> the LLC is overloaded. Since the overloaded status is checked
>> in the load balancing at LLC level, the interval is llc_size
>> miliseconds. The duration might be long enough to affect the
>> overall system throughput if idle cores are out of reach in
>> SIS domain scan.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/sched/fair.c | 15 +++++++++------
>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index a78d2e3b9d49..cd758b3616bd 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -6392,16 +6392,19 @@ static int select_idle_cpu(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, bool
>> struct sched_domain *this_sd;
>> u64 time = 0;
>>
>> - this_sd = rcu_dereference(*this_cpu_ptr(&sd_llc));
>> - if (!this_sd)
>> - return -1;
>> -
>> cpumask_and(cpus, sched_domain_span(sd), p->cpus_ptr);
>>
>> - if (sched_feat(SIS_PROP) && !has_idle_core) {
>> + if (has_idle_core)
>> + goto scan;
>> +
>> + if (sched_feat(SIS_PROP)) {
>> u64 avg_cost, avg_idle, span_avg;
>> unsigned long now = jiffies;
>>
>> + this_sd = rcu_dereference(*this_cpu_ptr(&sd_llc));
>> + if (!this_sd)
>> + return -1;
>> +
>
> I don't follow the change here. True that this_sd is used only in SIS_PROP, but it seems irrelevant with your
> commit. Does the position of this make any performance difference?
No, this change doesn't make much difference to performance. Are
you suggesting that I should make this a separate patch?
Thanks,
Abel
>
> Thanks.
>
>> /*
>> * If we're busy, the assumption that the last idle period
>> * predicts the future is flawed; age away the remaining
>> @@ -6436,7 +6439,7 @@ static int select_idle_cpu(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, bool
>> return -1;
>> }
>> }
>> -
>> +scan:
>> for_each_cpu_wrap(cpu, cpus, target + 1) {
>> if (has_idle_core) {
>> i = select_idle_core(p, cpu, cpus, &idle_cpu);
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-14 6:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-12 8:20 [PATCH 0/5] sched/fair: SIS improvements and cleanups Abel Wu
2022-07-12 8:20 ` [PATCH 1/5] sched/fair: ignore SIS_UTIL when has idle core Abel Wu
2022-07-13 3:47 ` Chen Yu
2022-07-13 16:14 ` Abel Wu
2022-07-14 6:19 ` Yicong Yang
2022-07-14 6:58 ` Abel Wu [this message]
2022-07-14 7:15 ` Yicong Yang
2022-07-14 8:00 ` Abel Wu
2022-07-14 8:16 ` Yicong Yang
2022-07-14 8:34 ` Yicong Yang
2022-08-04 9:59 ` Chen Yu
2022-08-15 2:54 ` Abel Wu
2022-08-10 13:50 ` Chen Yu
2022-08-15 2:44 ` Abel Wu
2022-08-29 13:08 ` Mel Gorman
2022-08-29 14:11 ` Abel Wu
2022-08-29 14:56 ` Mel Gorman
2022-09-01 13:08 ` Abel Wu
2022-09-02 4:12 ` Abel Wu
2022-09-02 10:25 ` Mel Gorman
2022-09-05 14:40 ` Abel Wu
2022-09-06 9:57 ` Mel Gorman
2022-09-07 7:27 ` Chen Yu
2022-09-07 8:41 ` Mel Gorman
2022-09-07 7:52 ` Abel Wu
2022-07-12 8:20 ` [PATCH 2/5] sched/fair: default to false in test_idle_cores Abel Wu
2022-08-29 12:36 ` Mel Gorman
2022-07-12 8:20 ` [PATCH 3/5] sched/fair: remove redundant check in select_idle_smt Abel Wu
2022-08-29 12:36 ` Mel Gorman
2022-07-12 8:20 ` [PATCH 4/5] sched/fair: avoid double search on same cpu Abel Wu
2022-08-29 12:36 ` Mel Gorman
2022-07-12 8:20 ` [PATCH 5/5] sched/fair: remove useless check in select_idle_core Abel Wu
2022-08-29 12:37 ` Mel Gorman
2022-08-15 13:31 ` [PATCH 0/5] sched/fair: SIS improvements and cleanups Abel Wu
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=4dde05be-8470-5984-0a30-ba077b9fe6bd@bytedance.com \
--to=wuyun.abel@bytedance.com \
--cc=joshdon@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=yangyicong@hisilicon.com \
--cc=yangyicong@huawei.com \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
/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).