From: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
mingo@redhat.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
morten.rasmussen@arm.com, chris.redpath@arm.com,
patrick.bellasi@arm.com, valentin.schneider@arm.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, thara.gopinath@linaro.org,
viresh.kumar@linaro.org, tkjos@google.com,
joel@joelfernandes.org, smuckle@google.com,
adharmap@codeaurora.org, skannan@codeaurora.org,
pkondeti@codeaurora.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
edubezval@gmail.com, srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com,
currojerez@riseup.net, javi.merino@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 09/15] sched: Introduce sched_energy_present static key
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2018 09:32:39 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181122093237.goxmr4p5l4h2izid@queper01-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181122091715.6kvhcbgoqrd54nbs@queper01-lin>
On Thursday 22 Nov 2018 at 09:17:16 (+0000), Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 Nov 2018 at 15:14:45 (+0000), Quentin Perret wrote:
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > On Wednesday 21 Nov 2018 at 14:08:22 (+0100), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 02:18:51PM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > >
> > > > +static void sched_energy_start(int ndoms_new, cpumask_var_t doms_new[])
> > > > +{
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * The conditions for EAS to start are checked during the creation of
> > > > + * root domains. If one of them meets all conditions, it will have a
> > > > + * non-null list of performance domains.
> > > > + */
> > > > + while (ndoms_new) {
> > > > + if (cpu_rq(cpumask_first(doms_new[ndoms_new - 1]))->rd->pd)
> > > > + goto enable;
> > > > + ndoms_new--;
> > > > + }
> > >
> > > That seems quite ugly; can't you simply return a bool from
> > > build_perf_domains() ?
> > >
> > > Something like the below, but less fugly ;-)
> > >
> > > --- a/kernel/sched/topology.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> > > @@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ static void destroy_perf_domain_rcu(stru
> > > #define EM_MAX_COMPLEXITY 2048
> > >
> > > extern struct cpufreq_governor schedutil_gov;
> > > -static void build_perf_domains(const struct cpumask *cpu_map)
> > > +static bool build_perf_domains(const struct cpumask *cpu_map)
> > > {
> > > int i, nr_pd = 0, nr_cs = 0, nr_cpus = cpumask_weight(cpu_map);
> > > struct perf_domain *pd = NULL, *tmp;
> > > @@ -365,7 +365,7 @@ static void build_perf_domains(const str
> > > if (tmp)
> > > call_rcu(&tmp->rcu, destroy_perf_domain_rcu);
> > >
> > > - return;
> > > + return !!pd;
> > >
> > > free:
> > > free_pd(pd);
> > > @@ -373,6 +373,8 @@ static void build_perf_domains(const str
> > > rcu_assign_pointer(rd->pd, NULL);
> > > if (tmp)
> > > call_rcu(&tmp->rcu, destroy_perf_domain_rcu);
> > > +
> > > + return false;
> > > }
> > > #else
> > > static void free_pd(struct perf_domain *pd) { }
> > > @@ -2173,6 +2175,9 @@ void partition_sched_domains(int ndoms_n
> > > }
> > >
> > > #if defined(CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL) && defined(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_SCHEDUTIL)
> > > + {
> > > + bool has_eas = false;
> >
> > That one wants to be declared '__maybe_unused' at the top of
> > partition_sched_domains() perhaps ? Just to avoid the { } section.
> > Hopefully the compiler will be smart enough to not use stack space for
> > it if not needed.
> >
> > > +
> > > /* Build perf. domains: */
> > > for (i = 0; i < ndoms_new; i++) {
> > > for (j = 0; j < n && !sched_energy_update; j++) {
> > > @@ -2181,10 +2186,13 @@ void partition_sched_domains(int ndoms_n
> > > goto match3;
> >
> > And we want to do 'has_eas = true' just before 'goto match3' here.
> > Otherwise we'll end up disabling EAS if we hit 'goto match3' for all
> > root domains.
> >
> > > }
> > > /* No match - add perf. domains for a new rd */
> > > - build_perf_domains(doms_new[i]);
> > > + has_eas |= build_perf_domains(doms_new[i]);
> > > match3:
> > > ;
> > > }
> > > +
> > > + sched_energy_set(has_eas);
> > > + }
> > > #endif
> > >
> > > /* Remember the new sched domains: */
> >
> > Other than that I guess that should work OK :-)
>
> So I actually just came across your patch that does
> static_branch_{inc,dec} on sched_smt_present. Maybe I could do something
> similar here ?
>
> How about something like the below (totally untested):
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/topology.c b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> index 8f9dfea60344..10ac32a0dc2e 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/topology.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> @@ -298,6 +298,7 @@ static void destroy_perf_domain_rcu(struct rcu_head *rp)
>
> pd = container_of(rp, struct perf_domain, rcu);
> free_pd(pd);
> + static_branch_dec_cpuslocked(&sched_energy_present);
> }
>
> static void sched_energy_start(int ndoms_new, cpumask_var_t doms_new[])
> @@ -421,6 +422,8 @@ static void build_perf_domains(const struct cpumask *cpu_map)
> /* Attach the new list of performance domains to the root domain. */
> tmp = rd->pd;
> rcu_assign_pointer(rd->pd, pd);
> + static_branch_inc_cpuslocked(&sched_energy_present);
> +
> if (tmp)
> call_rcu(&tmp->rcu, destroy_perf_domain_rcu);
>
> @@ -2246,7 +2249,6 @@ void partition_sched_domains(int ndoms_new, cpumask_var_t doms_new[],
> match3:
> ;
> }
> - sched_energy_start(ndoms_new, doms_new);
> #endif
>
> /* Remember the new sched domains: */
>
Hmm, I went too fast, that's totally broken. But there's still something
we can do with static_branch_{inc,dec} I think. I'll come back later
with a better solution.
Sorry for the noise :/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-22 9:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-19 14:18 [PATCH v9 00/15] Energy Aware Scheduling Quentin Perret
2018-11-19 14:18 ` [PATCH v9 01/15] sched: Relocate arch_scale_cpu_capacity Quentin Perret
2018-11-19 14:18 ` [PATCH v9 02/15] sched/cpufreq: Prepare schedutil for Energy Aware Scheduling Quentin Perret
2018-11-20 4:46 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-11-20 15:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-11-20 15:53 ` Quentin Perret
2018-11-19 14:18 ` [PATCH v9 03/15] PM: Introduce an Energy Model management framework Quentin Perret
2018-11-19 14:18 ` [PATCH v9 04/15] PM / EM: Expose the Energy Model in sysfs Quentin Perret
2018-11-19 14:18 ` [PATCH v9 05/15] sched/topology: Reference the Energy Model of CPUs when available Quentin Perret
2018-11-19 14:18 ` [PATCH v9 06/15] sched/topology: Lowest CPU asymmetry sched_domain level pointer Quentin Perret
2018-11-19 14:18 ` [PATCH v9 07/15] sched/topology: Disable EAS on inappropriate platforms Quentin Perret
2018-11-19 14:18 ` [PATCH v9 08/15] sched/topology: Make Energy Aware Scheduling depend on schedutil Quentin Perret
2018-11-22 14:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-11-22 15:49 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-11-22 15:56 ` Quentin Perret
2018-11-19 14:18 ` [PATCH v9 09/15] sched: Introduce sched_energy_present static key Quentin Perret
2018-11-21 13:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-11-21 15:14 ` Quentin Perret
2018-11-22 9:17 ` Quentin Perret
2018-11-22 9:32 ` Quentin Perret [this message]
2018-11-22 10:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-11-22 15:25 ` Quentin Perret
2018-11-22 15:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-11-22 15:55 ` Quentin Perret
2018-11-19 14:18 ` [PATCH v9 10/15] sched: Introduce a sysctl for Energy Aware Scheduling Quentin Perret
2018-11-19 14:18 ` [PATCH v9 11/15] sched/fair: Clean-up update_sg_lb_stats parameters Quentin Perret
2018-11-19 14:18 ` [PATCH v9 12/15] sched: Add over-utilization/tipping point indicator Quentin Perret
2018-11-19 14:18 ` [PATCH v9 13/15] sched/fair: Introduce an energy estimation helper function Quentin Perret
2018-11-21 14:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-11-21 16:05 ` Quentin Perret
2018-11-22 13:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-11-19 14:18 ` [PATCH v9 14/15] sched/fair: Select an energy-efficient CPU on task wake-up Quentin Perret
2018-11-19 14:18 ` [PATCH v9 15/15] OPTIONAL: cpufreq: dt: Register an Energy Model Quentin Perret
2018-11-20 6:19 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-11-20 10:01 ` Quentin Perret
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=20181122093237.goxmr4p5l4h2izid@queper01-lin \
--to=quentin.perret@arm.com \
--cc=adharmap@codeaurora.org \
--cc=chris.redpath@arm.com \
--cc=currojerez@riseup.net \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=edubezval@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=javi.merino@kernel.org \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=patrick.bellasi@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pkondeti@codeaurora.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=skannan@codeaurora.org \
--cc=smuckle@google.com \
--cc=srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com \
--cc=thara.gopinath@linaro.org \
--cc=tkjos@google.com \
--cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).