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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D84EEC433E0 for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 11:34:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D1E764E06 for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 11:34:03 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6D1E764E06 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=hisilicon.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Message-ID:Date: Subject:To:From:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=f5h3afEuaUcq5VzzGlOIaBvfYMjxLagDJOXBFvPODMw=; b=AW8tPK/ddwXEi4l20RVru7HxB /AjFBjQ1iDs9uMTWbNUs2IIedaur5JHy3Pxz4TVq3OdLOxVMm8ngG6qRAZfQuJyzH1M8+cEzCYWO4 fI9KcLrtB5iV8oJE9bF2F/bbzgMyg+iODjoZL0UKg4JJDcB+JaDfvy0bLTTWEhUsLtw4jok8Mo5mF Nu9H1lkxhwMX5hreAa7tfy8sUFMv0Zbkzrw9vuu6y5ED8viOYF3DCi9sAObXVnZHNVKGnHpzGkm1L KdcyePHiiLlq6uYZqbZ0lPDBR55loG78Zv3RHlg7cP8s3beCqhQGgCyNau6LW3Lp/tuUxijDmpcRZ HmujxA4AA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1l7GOp-0002ek-8S; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 11:32:43 +0000 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com ([185.176.79.56]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1l7GOl-0002dy-Bu for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 11:32:40 +0000 Received: from fraeml707-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.206]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4DVzwK5ZvJz67kYJ; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 19:29:05 +0800 (CST) Received: from lhreml719-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.70) by fraeml707-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2106.2; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 12:32:35 +0100 Received: from dggemi761-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.198.147) by lhreml719-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.70) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256) id 15.1.2106.2; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 11:32:34 +0000 Received: from dggemi761-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.9.49.202]) by dggemi761-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.9.49.202]) with mapi id 15.01.2106.006; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 19:32:32 +0800 From: "Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)" To: Tim Chen , "valentin.schneider@arm.com" , "catalin.marinas@arm.com" , "will@kernel.org" , "rjw@rjwysocki.net" , "vincent.guittot@linaro.org" , "lenb@kernel.org" , "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" , Jonathan Cameron , "mingo@redhat.com" , "peterz@infradead.org" , "juri.lelli@redhat.com" , "dietmar.eggemann@arm.com" , "rostedt@goodmis.org" , "bsegall@google.com" , "mgorman@suse.de" , "mark.rutland@arm.com" , "sudeep.holla@arm.com" , "aubrey.li@linux.intel.com" Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v3 0/2] scheduler: expose the topology of clusters and add cluster scheduler Thread-Topic: [RFC PATCH v3 0/2] scheduler: expose the topology of clusters and add cluster scheduler Thread-Index: AQHW5AbtPZ7BCMS2PUiSVVUiYd0GPqocSCyAgCouMeA= Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 11:32:32 +0000 Message-ID: <38ce39d2d4754d76934bb07370eff48b@hisilicon.com> References: <20210106083026.40444-1-song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com> <737932c9-846a-0a6b-08b8-e2d2d95b67ce@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <737932c9-846a-0a6b-08b8-e2d2d95b67ce@linux.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.126.200.87] MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20210203_063239_683196_83605F06 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 17.04 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "Zengtao \(B\)" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linuxarm@openeuler.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "xuwei \(O\)" , "tiantao \(H\)" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Tim Chen [mailto:tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com] > Sent: Friday, January 8, 2021 12:17 PM > To: Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) ; > valentin.schneider@arm.com; catalin.marinas@arm.com; will@kernel.org; > rjw@rjwysocki.net; vincent.guittot@linaro.org; lenb@kernel.org; > gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; Jonathan Cameron ; > mingo@redhat.com; peterz@infradead.org; juri.lelli@redhat.com; > dietmar.eggemann@arm.com; rostedt@goodmis.org; bsegall@google.com; > mgorman@suse.de; mark.rutland@arm.com; sudeep.holla@arm.com; > aubrey.li@linux.intel.com > Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org; linuxarm@openeuler.org; xuwei (O) > ; Zengtao (B) ; tiantao (H) > > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 0/2] scheduler: expose the topology of clusters and > add cluster scheduler > > > > On 1/6/21 12:30 AM, Barry Song wrote: > > ARM64 server chip Kunpeng 920 has 6 clusters in each NUMA node, and each > > cluster has 4 cpus. All clusters share L3 cache data while each cluster > > has local L3 tag. On the other hand, each cluster will share some > > internal system bus. This means cache is much more affine inside one cluster > > than across clusters. > > > > +-----------------------------------+ +---------+ > > | +------+ +------+ +---------------------------+ | > > | | CPU0 | | cpu1 | | +-----------+ | | > > | +------+ +------+ | | | | | > > | +----+ L3 | | | > > | +------+ +------+ cluster | | tag | | | > > | | CPU2 | | CPU3 | | | | | | > > | +------+ +------+ | +-----------+ | | > > | | | | > > +-----------------------------------+ | | > > +-----------------------------------+ | | > > | +------+ +------+ +--------------------------+ | > > | | | | | | +-----------+ | | > > | +------+ +------+ | | | | | > > | | | L3 | | | > > | +------+ +------+ +----+ tag | | | > > | | | | | | | | | | > > | +------+ +------+ | +-----------+ | | > > | | | | > > +-----------------------------------+ | L3 | > > | data | > > +-----------------------------------+ | | > > | +------+ +------+ | +-----------+ | | > > | | | | | | | | | | > > | +------+ +------+ +----+ L3 | | | > > | | | tag | | | > > | +------+ +------+ | | | | | > > | | | | | ++ +-----------+ | | > > | +------+ +------+ |---------------------------+ | > > +-----------------------------------| | | > > +-----------------------------------| | | > > | +------+ +------+ +---------------------------+ | > > | | | | | | +-----------+ | | > > | +------+ +------+ | | | | | > > | +----+ L3 | | | > > | +------+ +------+ | | tag | | | > > | | | | | | | | | | > > | +------+ +------+ | +-----------+ | | > > | | | | > > +-----------------------------------+ | | > > +-----------------------------------+ | | > > | +------+ +------+ +--------------------------+ | > > | | | | | | +-----------+ | | > > | +------+ +------+ | | | | | > > > > > > There is a similar need for clustering in x86. Some x86 cores could share L2 > caches that > is similar to the cluster in Kupeng 920 (e.g. on Jacobsville there are 6 clusters > of 4 Atom cores, each cluster sharing a separate L2, and 24 cores sharing L3). > Having a sched domain at the L2 cluster helps spread load among > L2 domains. This will reduce L2 cache contention and help with > performance for low to moderate load scenarios. > > The cluster detection mechanism will need > to be based on L2 cache sharing in this case. I suggest making the > cluster detection to be CPU architecture dependent so both ARM64 and x86 use > cases > can be accommodated. > > Attached below are two RFC patches for creating x86 L2 > cache sched domain, sans the idle cpu selection on wake up code. It is > similar enough in concept to Barry's patch that we should have a > single patchset that accommodates both use cases. Hi Tim, Agreed on this. hopefully the RFC v4 I am preparing will cover your case. > > Thanks. > > Tim Thanks Barry _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel