From: Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@codeaurora.org>
To: Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] sched/rt: fix pushing unfit tasks to a better CPU
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 08:16:09 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200219024608.GE28029@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200218174718.ma6cpr2qwnueertn@e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 05:47:19PM +0000, Qais Yousef wrote:
> On 02/18/20 09:46, Pavan Kondeti wrote:
> > The original RT task placement i.e without capacity awareness, places the task
> > on the previous CPU if the task can preempt the running task. I interpreted it
> > as that "higher prio RT" task should get better treatment even if it results
> > in stopping the lower prio RT execution and migrating it to another CPU.
> >
> > Now coming to your patch (merged), we force find_lowest_rq() if the previous
> > CPU can't fit the task though this task can right away run there. When the
> > lowest mask returns an unfit CPU (with your new patch), We have two choices,
> > either to place it on this unfit CPU (may involve migration) or place it on
> > the previous CPU to avoid the migration. We are selecting the first approach.
> >
> > The task_cpu(p) check in find_lowest_rq() only works when the previous CPU
> > does not have a RT task. If it is running a lower prio RT task than the
> > waking task, the lowest_mask may not contain the previous CPU.
> >
> > I don't if any workload hurts due to this change in behavior. So not sure
> > if we have to restore the original behavior. Something like below will do.
>
> Is this patch equivalent to yours? If yes, then I got you. If not, then I need
> to re-read this again..
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/rt.c b/kernel/sched/rt.c
> index ace9acf9d63c..854a0c9a7be6 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/rt.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c
> @@ -1476,6 +1476,13 @@ select_task_rq_rt(struct task_struct *p, int cpu, int sd_flag, int flags)
> if (test || !rt_task_fits_capacity(p, cpu)) {
> int target = find_lowest_rq(p);
>
> + /*
> + * Bail out if we were forcing a migration to find a better
> + * fitting CPU but our search failed.
> + */
> + if (!test && !rt_task_fits_capacity(p, target))
> + goto out_unlock;
> +
Yes. This is what I was referring to.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-19 2:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-14 16:39 [PATCH 0/3] RT Capacity Awareness Improvements Qais Yousef
2020-02-14 16:39 ` [PATCH 1/3] sched/rt: cpupri_find: implement fallback mechanism for !fit case Qais Yousef
2020-02-17 17:07 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-02-17 23:34 ` Qais Yousef
2020-02-18 10:01 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-02-17 19:09 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-02-17 23:45 ` Qais Yousef
2020-02-18 9:53 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-02-18 17:28 ` Qais Yousef
2020-02-18 16:46 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-02-18 17:27 ` Qais Yousef
2020-02-18 18:03 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-02-18 18:52 ` Qais Yousef
2020-02-14 16:39 ` [PATCH 2/3] sched/rt: allow pulling unfitting task Qais Yousef
2020-02-17 9:10 ` Pavan Kondeti
2020-02-17 11:20 ` Qais Yousef
2020-02-19 13:43 ` Qais Yousef
2020-02-21 8:07 ` Pavan Kondeti
2020-02-21 11:08 ` Qais Yousef
2020-02-14 16:39 ` [PATCH 3/3] sched/rt: fix pushing unfit tasks to a better CPU Qais Yousef
2020-02-17 9:23 ` Pavan Kondeti
2020-02-17 13:53 ` Qais Yousef
2020-02-18 4:16 ` Pavan Kondeti
2020-02-18 17:47 ` Qais Yousef
2020-02-19 2:46 ` Pavan Kondeti [this message]
2020-02-19 10:46 ` Qais Yousef
2020-02-19 14:02 ` Qais Yousef
2020-02-21 8:15 ` Pavan Kondeti
2020-02-21 11:12 ` Qais Yousef
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=20200219024608.GE28029@codeaurora.org \
--to=pkondeti@codeaurora.org \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@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).