From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751845AbeA2Qgw (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jan 2018 11:36:52 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:43409 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751822AbeA2Qgt (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jan 2018 11:36:49 -0500 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 17:36:42 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Patrick Bellasi Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar , Vincent Guittot , Paul Turner , Dietmar Eggemann , Morten Rasmussen , Juri Lelli , Todd Kjos , Joel Fernandes , Steve Muckle Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] sched/fair: add util_est on top of PELT Message-ID: <20180129163642.GF2228@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20180123180847.4477-1-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> <20180123180847.4477-2-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180123180847.4477-2-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 06:08:45PM +0000, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > +static inline void util_est_dequeue(struct task_struct *p, int flags) > +{ > + struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq = &task_rq(p)->cfs; > + unsigned long util_last = task_util(p); > + bool sleep = flags & DEQUEUE_SLEEP; > + unsigned long ewma; > + long util_est = 0; > + > + if (!sched_feat(UTIL_EST)) > + return; > + > + /* > + * Update root cfs_rq's estimated utilization > + * > + * If *p is the last task then the root cfs_rq's estimated utilization > + * of a CPU is 0 by definition. > + */ > + if (cfs_rq->nr_running) { > + util_est = READ_ONCE(cfs_rq->util_est_runnable); > + util_est -= min_t(long, util_est, task_util_est(p)); > + } > + WRITE_ONCE(cfs_rq->util_est_runnable, util_est); > + > + /* > + * Skip update of task's estimated utilization when the task has not > + * yet completed an activation, e.g. being migrated. > + */ > + if (!sleep) > + return; > + Since you only use sleep once, you might as well write it out there. Also, does GCC lower the task_util() eval to here? > + /* > + * Skip update of task's estimated utilization when its EWMA is already > + * ~1% close to its last activation value. > + */ > + util_est = p->util_est.ewma; > + if (abs(util_est - util_last) <= (SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE / 100)) > + return; Aside from that being whitespace challenged, did you also try: if ((unsigned)((util_est - util_last) + LIM - 1) < (2 * LIM - 1)) Also, since we only care about the absolute value; we could use: util_last - ewma here (note the above also forgets to use READ_ONCE), and reuse the result: > + > + /* > + * Update Task's estimated utilization > + * > + * When *p completes an activation we can consolidate another sample > + * about the task size. This is done by storing the last PELT value > + * for this task and using this value to load another sample in the > + * exponential weighted moving average: > + * > + * ewma(t) = w * task_util(p) + (1 - w) ewma(t-1) > + * = w * task_util(p) + ewma(t-1) - w * ewma(t-1) > + * = w * (task_util(p) + ewma(t-1) / w - ewma(t-1)) > + * > + * Where 'w' is the weight of new samples, which is configured to be > + * 0.25, thus making w=1/4 > + */ > + p->se.avg.util_est.last = util_last; > + ewma = READ_ONCE(p->se.avg.util_est.ewma); > + ewma = util_last + (ewma << UTIL_EST_WEIGHT_SHIFT) - ewma; here. > + ewma >>= UTIL_EST_WEIGHT_SHIFT; > + WRITE_ONCE(p->se.avg.util_est.ewma, ewma); > +} So something along these lines: ewma = READ_ONCE(p->se.avg.util_est.ewma); diff = util_last - ewma; if ((unsigned)(diff + LIM - 1) < (2 * LIM - 1)) return; p->se.avg.util_est.last = util_last; ewma = (diff + (ewma << EWMA_SHIFT)) >> EWMA_SHIFT; WRITE_ONCE(p->se.avg.util_est.ewma, ewma); Make sense?