All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
To: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, juri.lelli@gmail.com,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, bristot@redhat.com, kernel-team@lge.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/4] Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2017 11:19:13 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170602021913.GC3623@X58A-UD3R> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1495504859-10960-1-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com>

On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:00:55AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> When cpudl_find() returns any among free_cpus, the cpu might not be
> closer than others, considering sched domain. For example:
> 
>    this_cpu: 15
>    free_cpus: 0, 1,..., 14 (== later_mask)
>    best_cpu: 0
> 
>    topology:
> 
>    0 --+
>        +--+
>    1 --+  |
>           +-- ... --+
>    2 --+  |         |
>        +--+         |
>    3 --+            |
> 
>    ...             ...
> 
>    12 --+           |
>         +--+        |
>    13 --+  |        |
>            +-- ... -+
>    14 --+  |
>         +--+
>    15 --+
> 
> In this case, it would be best to select 14 since it's a free cpu and
> closest to 15(this_cpu). However, currently the code select 0(best_cpu)
> even though that's just any among free_cpus. Fix it.

Hi, Peterz,

I wonder if you remember what I answered your question about applying
this approach into rt policy. Rt *already* works as expected.

And I implemented what you suggested, SD_PREFER_SIBLING. It would be
appriciated to check if I works correctly.

Thank you,
Byungchul

> 
> Change from v4
>    -. remove a patch that might cause huge lock contention
>       (by spin lock(&cpudl.lock) in a hot path of scheduler)
> 
> Change from v3
>    -. rename closest_cpu to best_cpu so that it align with rt
>    -. protect referring cpudl.elements with cpudl.lock
>    -. change return value of cpudl_find() to bool
> 
> Change from v2
>    -. add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING
> 
> Change from v1
>    -. clean up the patch
> 
> Byungchul Park (4):
>   sched/deadline: Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology
>   sched/deadline: Change return value of cpudl_find()
>   sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq()
>   sched/rt: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_lowest_rq()
> 
>  kernel/sched/cpudeadline.c | 26 ++++++++++++-------------
>  kernel/sched/deadline.c    | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>  kernel/sched/rt.c          | 17 ++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 1.9.1

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-06-02  2:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-23  2:00 [PATCH v5 0/4] Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park
2017-05-23  2:00 ` [PATCH v5 1/4] sched/deadline: " Byungchul Park
2017-07-12 13:13   ` Juri Lelli
2017-07-13  1:38     ` Byungchul Park
2017-08-10 12:08   ` [tip:sched/core] sched/deadline: Make find_later_rq() choose a closer CPU " tip-bot for Byungchul Park
2017-05-23  2:00 ` [PATCH v5 2/4] sched/deadline: Change return value of cpudl_find() Byungchul Park
2017-07-12 13:22   ` Juri Lelli
2017-07-13  1:24     ` Byungchul Park
2017-08-10 12:08   ` [tip:sched/core] " tip-bot for Byungchul Park
2017-05-23  2:00 ` [PATCH v5 3/4] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-08-03 12:03   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-04  5:16     ` Byungchul Park
2017-05-23  2:00 ` [PATCH v5 4/4] sched/rt: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_lowest_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-06-02  2:19 ` Byungchul Park [this message]
2017-07-12  2:44 ` [PATCH v5 0/4] Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park

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=20170602021913.GC3623@X58A-UD3R \
    --to=byungchul.park@lge.com \
    --cc=bristot@redhat.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@lge.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.