All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>
To: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
	K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
	"Gautham R . Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/7] sched/fair: remove useless check in select_idle_core
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 17:41:06 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABk29Ns8C6iQJHkJNAhNOm2=CVjApicK5Y5teUSMjb2ncEx4_w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <73ab0143-b518-c0b5-328e-c8f3ec7013ed@bytedance.com>

On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 8:51 PM Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 6/28/22 7:42 AM, Josh Don Wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 19, 2022 at 5:05 AM Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> The function only gets called when sds->has_idle_cores is true which can
> >> be possible only when sched_smt_present is enabled.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>
> >> ---
> >>   kernel/sched/fair.c | 3 ---
> >>   1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> >> index aba1dad19574..1cc86e76e38e 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> >> @@ -6256,9 +6256,6 @@ static int select_idle_core(struct task_struct *p, int core, struct cpumask *cpu
> >>          bool idle = true;
> >>          int cpu;
> >>
> >> -       if (!static_branch_likely(&sched_smt_present))
> >> -               return __select_idle_cpu(core, p);
> >> -
> >
> > The static branch is basically free; although you're right that we
> > currently don't take !smt_present branch direction here, it doesn't
> > seem harmful to leave this check in case assumptions change about when
> > we call select_idle_core().
>
> I was thinking that it would be better to align with select_idle_smt
> that the caller do the check if necessary.

The difference there though is that select_idle_smt() is called
directly under the sched_smt_active() check, whereas the
select_idle_core() is a few nested function calls away (and relies on
has_idle_core rather than sched_smt_active() directly). So it is a bit
harder to codify this expectation. Since we're using a static_branch
here, I don't see a strong reason to remove it.

> >
> >>          for_each_cpu(cpu, cpu_smt_mask(core)) {
> >>                  if (!available_idle_cpu(cpu)) {
> >>                          idle = false;
> >> --
> >> 2.31.1
> >>

  reply	other threads:[~2022-06-29  0:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-06-19 12:04 [PATCH v4 0/7] sched/fair: improve scan efficiency of SIS Abel Wu
2022-06-19 12:04 ` [PATCH v4 1/7] sched/fair: default to false in test_idle_cores Abel Wu
2022-06-27 22:53   ` Josh Don
2022-06-28  3:39     ` Abel Wu
2022-06-19 12:04 ` [PATCH v4 2/7] sched/fair: remove redundant check in select_idle_smt Abel Wu
2022-06-27 23:17   ` Josh Don
2022-06-19 12:04 ` [PATCH v4 3/7] sched/fair: avoid double search on same cpu Abel Wu
2022-06-27 23:24   ` Josh Don
2022-06-19 12:04 ` [PATCH v4 4/7] sched/fair: remove useless check in select_idle_core Abel Wu
2022-06-27 23:42   ` Josh Don
2022-06-28  3:51     ` Abel Wu
2022-06-29  0:41       ` Josh Don [this message]
2022-06-19 12:04 ` [PATCH v4 5/7] sched/fair: skip SIS domain search if fully busy Abel Wu
2022-06-28  0:28   ` Josh Don
2022-06-28  6:53     ` Abel Wu
2022-06-29  1:11       ` Josh Don
2022-06-29  7:05         ` Abel Wu
2022-07-20 15:34   ` Gautham R. Shenoy
2022-08-15  9:49     ` Abel Wu
2022-06-19 12:04 ` [PATCH v4 6/7] sched/fair: skip busy cores in SIS search Abel Wu
2022-06-21 18:14   ` Chen Yu
2022-06-22  3:52     ` [External] " Abel Wu
2022-06-24  3:30       ` Chen Yu
2022-06-27 10:13         ` Abel Wu
2022-06-28  7:58           ` Abel Wu
2022-06-30  4:16             ` Chen Yu
2022-06-30 10:46               ` Abel Wu
2022-07-09  8:55                 ` Chen Yu
2022-07-09 15:56                   ` Abel Wu
2022-07-11 12:02                     ` Chen Yu
2022-07-13 10:25                       ` Abel Wu
2022-06-22  4:03     ` Abel Wu
2022-07-20 16:16   ` Gautham R. Shenoy
2022-08-15  9:49     ` Abel Wu
2022-06-19 12:04 ` [PATCH v4 7/7] sched/fair: de-entropy for SIS filter Abel Wu
2022-06-21 18:23   ` Chen Yu
2022-06-22  4:01     ` Abel Wu
2022-06-30  7:46   ` Abel Wu
2022-07-09 14:42   ` [sched/fair] 32fe13cd7a: phoronix-test-suite.fio.SequentialWrite.IO_uring.Yes.No.4KB.DefaultTestDirectory.mb_s -11.7% regression kernel test robot
2022-07-09 14:42     ` kernel test robot
2022-07-09 16:14     ` Abel Wu
2022-07-09 16:14       ` Abel Wu
2022-07-20 17:08   ` [PATCH v4 7/7] sched/fair: de-entropy for SIS filter Gautham R. Shenoy
2022-08-15  9:49     ` Abel Wu
2022-07-06  9:51 ` [PATCH v4 0/7] sched/fair: improve scan efficiency of SIS Abel Wu
2022-07-18 11:00 ` K Prateek Nayak
2022-08-15 13:59   ` 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='CABk29Ns8C6iQJHkJNAhNOm2=CVjApicK5Y5teUSMjb2ncEx4_w@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=joshdon@google.com \
    --cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
    --cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=wuyun.abel@bytedance.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 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.