From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5303EC77B73 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 14:10:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S243837AbjD0OKn (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Apr 2023 10:10:43 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:60064 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S243834AbjD0OKk (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Apr 2023 10:10:40 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFEFB46AE for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 07:10:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B34FA1063; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 07:11:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.196.177] (eglon.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.196.177]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2FFD73FA1D; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 07:10:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01e0704c-6d69-07ca-8a3b-c2cff498c972@arm.com> Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2023 15:09:58 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux aarch64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.13.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 08/19] x86/resctrl: Add cpumask_any_housekeeping() for limbo/overflow Content-Language: en-GB To: =?UTF-8?Q?Ilpo_J=c3=a4rvinen?= Cc: x86@kernel.org, LKML , Fenghua Yu , Reinette Chatre , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , H Peter Anvin , Babu Moger , shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com, D Scott Phillips OS , carl@os.amperecomputing.com, lcherian@marvell.com, bobo.shaobowang@huawei.com, tan.shaopeng@fujitsu.com, xingxin.hx@openanolis.org, baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, Jamie Iles , Xin Hao , peternewman@google.com References: <20230320172620.18254-1-james.morse@arm.com> <20230320172620.18254-9-james.morse@arm.com> <8f10581c-63ff-fef5-4f9e-d1ded096528@linux.intel.com> From: James Morse In-Reply-To: <8f10581c-63ff-fef5-4f9e-d1ded096528@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Ilpo, On 21/03/2023 15:14, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: > On Mon, 20 Mar 2023, James Morse wrote: > >> The limbo and overflow code picks a CPU to use from the domain's list >> of online CPUs. Work is then scheduled on these CPUs to maintain >> the limbo list and any counters that may overflow. >> >> cpumask_any() may pick a CPU that is marked nohz_full, which will >> either penalise the work that CPU was dedicated to, or delay the >> processing of limbo list or counters that may overflow. Perhaps >> indefinitely. Delaying the overflow handling will skew the bandwidth >> values calculated by mba_sc, which expects to be called once a second. >> >> Add cpumask_any_housekeeping() as a replacement for cpumask_any() >> that prefers housekeeping CPUs. This helper will still return >> a nohz_full CPU if that is the only option. The CPU to use is >> re-evaluated each time the limbo/overflow work runs. This ensures >> the work will move off a nohz_full CPU once a houskeeping CPU is > > housekeeping > >> available. >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h >> index 87545e4beb70..0b5fd5a0cda2 100644 >> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h >> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h >> +/** >> + * cpumask_any_housekeeping() - Chose any cpu in @mask, preferring those that >> + * aren't marked nohz_full >> + * @mask: The mask to pick a CPU from. >> + * >> + * Returns a CPU in @mask. If there are houskeeping CPUs that don't use >> + * nohz_full, these are preferred. >> + */ >> +static inline unsigned int cpumask_any_housekeeping(const struct cpumask *mask) >> +{ >> + int cpu, hk_cpu; >> + >> + cpu = cpumask_any(mask); >> + if (tick_nohz_full_cpu(cpu)) { >> + hk_cpu = cpumask_nth_andnot(0, mask, tick_nohz_full_mask); > > Why cpumask_nth_and() is not enough here? ..._andnot() seems to alter > tick_nohz_full_mask which doesn't seem desirable? tick_nohz_full_mask is the list of CPUs we should avoid. This wants to find the first cpu set in the domain mask, and clear in tick_nohz_full_mask. Where does cpumask_nth_andnot() modify its arguments? Its arguments are const. Thanks, James