All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] sched/fair: Simplify the code of should_we_balance()
@ 2020-04-11  9:20 Peng Wang
  2020-04-12  8:42 ` Peng Wang
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Peng Wang @ 2020-04-11  9:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: mingo, peterz, uri.lelli, vincent.guittot, dietmar.eggemann,
	rostedt, bsegall, mgorman
  Cc: linux-kernel

We only consider group_balance_cpu() after there is no idle
cpu. So, just do comparison before return at these two cases.

Signed-off-by: Peng Wang <rocking@linux.alibaba.com>
---
 kernel/sched/fair.c | 16 +++++-----------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 1ea3ddd..81b2c647 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -9413,7 +9413,7 @@ static int active_load_balance_cpu_stop(void *data);
 static int should_we_balance(struct lb_env *env)
 {
 	struct sched_group *sg = env->sd->groups;
-	int cpu, balance_cpu = -1;
+	int cpu;
 
 	/*
 	 * Ensure the balancing environment is consistent; can happen
@@ -9434,18 +9434,12 @@ static int should_we_balance(struct lb_env *env)
 		if (!idle_cpu(cpu))
 			continue;
 
-		balance_cpu = cpu;
-		break;
+		/* Are we the first idle CPU? */
+		return cpu == env->dst_cpu;
 	}
 
-	if (balance_cpu == -1)
-		balance_cpu = group_balance_cpu(sg);
-
-	/*
-	 * First idle CPU or the first CPU(busiest) in this sched group
-	 * is eligible for doing load balancing at this and above domains.
-	 */
-	return balance_cpu == env->dst_cpu;
+	/* Are we the first balance CPU of this group? */
+	return group_balance_cpu(sg) == env->dst_cpu;
 }
 
 /*
-- 
2.9.5


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Simplify the code of should_we_balance()
  2020-04-11  9:20 [PATCH] sched/fair: Simplify the code of should_we_balance() Peng Wang
@ 2020-04-12  8:42 ` Peng Wang
  2020-04-13 20:32   ` Valentin Schneider
  2020-04-14  7:25 ` Vincent Guittot
  2020-04-14  8:48 ` [PATCH v2] " Peng Wang
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Peng Wang @ 2020-04-12  8:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: mingo, peterz, juri.lelli, vincent.guittot, dietmar.eggemann,
	rostedt, bsegall, mgorman
  Cc: linux-kernel

On 4/11/20 5:20 PM, Peng Wang wrote:
> We only consider group_balance_cpu() after there is no idle
> cpu. So, just do comparison before return at these two cases.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peng Wang <rocking@linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
>   kernel/sched/fair.c | 16 +++++-----------
>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 1ea3ddd..81b2c647 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -9413,7 +9413,7 @@ static int active_load_balance_cpu_stop(void *data);
>   static int should_we_balance(struct lb_env *env)
>   {
>   	struct sched_group *sg = env->sd->groups;
> -	int cpu, balance_cpu = -1;
> +	int cpu;
>   
>   	/*
>   	 * Ensure the balancing environment is consistent; can happen
> @@ -9434,18 +9434,12 @@ static int should_we_balance(struct lb_env *env)
>   		if (!idle_cpu(cpu))
>   			continue;
>   
> -		balance_cpu = cpu;
> -		break;
> +		/* Are we the first idle CPU? */
> +		return cpu == env->dst_cpu;
>   	}
>   
> -	if (balance_cpu == -1)
> -		balance_cpu = group_balance_cpu(sg);
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * First idle CPU or the first CPU(busiest) in this sched group
> -	 * is eligible for doing load balancing at this and above domains.
> -	 */
> -	return balance_cpu == env->dst_cpu;
> +	/* Are we the first balance CPU of this group? */
> +	return group_balance_cpu(sg) == env->dst_cpu;
>   }
>   
>   /*
> 

+juri.lelli@redhat.com

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Simplify the code of should_we_balance()
  2020-04-12  8:42 ` Peng Wang
@ 2020-04-13 20:32   ` Valentin Schneider
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Valentin Schneider @ 2020-04-13 20:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Peng Wang
  Cc: mingo, peterz, juri.lelli, vincent.guittot, dietmar.eggemann,
	rostedt, bsegall, mgorman, linux-kernel


On 12/04/20 09:42, Peng Wang wrote:
> On 4/11/20 5:20 PM, Peng Wang wrote:
>> We only consider group_balance_cpu() after there is no idle
>> cpu. So, just do comparison before return at these two cases.
>>

It's not really changing much, but if it helps making it a bit more
readable, why not. Small nit below.

Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>

>> Signed-off-by: Peng Wang <rocking@linux.alibaba.com>
>> ---
>>   kernel/sched/fair.c | 16 +++++-----------
>>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index 1ea3ddd..81b2c647 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -9413,7 +9413,7 @@ static int active_load_balance_cpu_stop(void *data);
>>   static int should_we_balance(struct lb_env *env)
>>   {
>>      struct sched_group *sg = env->sd->groups;
>> -	int cpu, balance_cpu = -1;
>> +	int cpu;
>>
>>      /*
>>       * Ensure the balancing environment is consistent; can happen
>> @@ -9434,18 +9434,12 @@ static int should_we_balance(struct lb_env *env)
>>              if (!idle_cpu(cpu))
>>                      continue;
>>
>> -		balance_cpu = cpu;
>> -		break;
>> +		/* Are we the first idle CPU? */
>> +		return cpu == env->dst_cpu;
>>      }
>>
>> -	if (balance_cpu == -1)
>> -		balance_cpu = group_balance_cpu(sg);
>> -
>> -	/*
>> -	 * First idle CPU or the first CPU(busiest) in this sched group
>> -	 * is eligible for doing load balancing at this and above domains.
>> -	 */
>> -	return balance_cpu == env->dst_cpu;
>> +	/* Are we the first balance CPU of this group? */

Nit: That should be either "the balance CPU" or "the first CPU in the group
balance mask"

>> +	return group_balance_cpu(sg) == env->dst_cpu;
>>   }
>>
>>   /*
>>
>
> +juri.lelli@redhat.com

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Simplify the code of should_we_balance()
  2020-04-11  9:20 [PATCH] sched/fair: Simplify the code of should_we_balance() Peng Wang
  2020-04-12  8:42 ` Peng Wang
@ 2020-04-14  7:25 ` Vincent Guittot
  2020-04-14 10:57   ` Peter Zijlstra
  2020-04-14  8:48 ` [PATCH v2] " Peng Wang
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Vincent Guittot @ 2020-04-14  7:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Peng Wang
  Cc: Ingo Molnar, Peter Zijlstra, uri.lelli, Dietmar Eggemann,
	Steven Rostedt, Ben Segall, Mel Gorman, linux-kernel

On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 at 11:21, Peng Wang <rocking@linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
>
> We only consider group_balance_cpu() after there is no idle
> cpu. So, just do comparison before return at these two cases.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peng Wang <rocking@linux.alibaba.com>

With the small fix in the comment below
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>

> ---
>  kernel/sched/fair.c | 16 +++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 1ea3ddd..81b2c647 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -9413,7 +9413,7 @@ static int active_load_balance_cpu_stop(void *data);
>  static int should_we_balance(struct lb_env *env)
>  {
>         struct sched_group *sg = env->sd->groups;
> -       int cpu, balance_cpu = -1;
> +       int cpu;
>
>         /*
>          * Ensure the balancing environment is consistent; can happen
> @@ -9434,18 +9434,12 @@ static int should_we_balance(struct lb_env *env)
>                 if (!idle_cpu(cpu))
>                         continue;
>
> -               balance_cpu = cpu;
> -               break;
> +               /* Are we the first idle CPU? */
> +               return cpu == env->dst_cpu;
>         }
>
> -       if (balance_cpu == -1)
> -               balance_cpu = group_balance_cpu(sg);
> -
> -       /*
> -        * First idle CPU or the first CPU(busiest) in this sched group
> -        * is eligible for doing load balancing at this and above domains.
> -        */
> -       return balance_cpu == env->dst_cpu;
> +       /* Are we the first balance CPU of this group? */

/* Are we the first CPU of this group ? */

> +       return group_balance_cpu(sg) == env->dst_cpu;
>  }
>
>  /*
> --
> 2.9.5
>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* [PATCH v2] sched/fair: Simplify the code of should_we_balance()
  2020-04-11  9:20 [PATCH] sched/fair: Simplify the code of should_we_balance() Peng Wang
  2020-04-12  8:42 ` Peng Wang
  2020-04-14  7:25 ` Vincent Guittot
@ 2020-04-14  8:48 ` Peng Wang
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Peng Wang @ 2020-04-14  8:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: mingo, peterz, juri.lelli, vincent.guittot, dietmar.eggemann,
	rostedt, bsegall, mgorman
  Cc: linux-kernel

We only consider group_balance_cpu() after there is no idle
cpu. So, just do comparison before return at these two cases.

Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peng Wang <rocking@linux.alibaba.com>
---
 kernel/sched/fair.c | 16 +++++-----------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 02f323b..c3f57f4 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -9409,7 +9409,7 @@ static int active_load_balance_cpu_stop(void *data);
 static int should_we_balance(struct lb_env *env)
 {
 	struct sched_group *sg = env->sd->groups;
-	int cpu, balance_cpu = -1;
+	int cpu;
 
 	/*
 	 * Ensure the balancing environment is consistent; can happen
@@ -9430,18 +9430,12 @@ static int should_we_balance(struct lb_env *env)
 		if (!idle_cpu(cpu))
 			continue;
 
-		balance_cpu = cpu;
-		break;
+		/* Are we the first idle CPU? */
+		return cpu == env->dst_cpu;
 	}
 
-	if (balance_cpu == -1)
-		balance_cpu = group_balance_cpu(sg);
-
-	/*
-	 * First idle CPU or the first CPU(busiest) in this sched group
-	 * is eligible for doing load balancing at this and above domains.
-	 */
-	return balance_cpu == env->dst_cpu;
+	/* Are we the first CPU in the balance mask of this group? */
+	return group_balance_cpu(sg) == env->dst_cpu;
 }
 
 /*
-- 
2.9.5


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Simplify the code of should_we_balance()
  2020-04-14  7:25 ` Vincent Guittot
@ 2020-04-14 10:57   ` Peter Zijlstra
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Peter Zijlstra @ 2020-04-14 10:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Vincent Guittot
  Cc: Peng Wang, Ingo Molnar, uri.lelli, Dietmar Eggemann,
	Steven Rostedt, Ben Segall, Mel Gorman, linux-kernel

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 09:25:00AM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 at 11:21, Peng Wang <rocking@linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
> >
> > We only consider group_balance_cpu() after there is no idle
> > cpu. So, just do comparison before return at these two cases.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peng Wang <rocking@linux.alibaba.com>
> 
> With the small fix in the comment below

Done

> Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>

Thanks Guys!

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2020-04-14 10:58 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-04-11  9:20 [PATCH] sched/fair: Simplify the code of should_we_balance() Peng Wang
2020-04-12  8:42 ` Peng Wang
2020-04-13 20:32   ` Valentin Schneider
2020-04-14  7:25 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-04-14 10:57   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-04-14  8:48 ` [PATCH v2] " Peng Wang

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.