From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@kernel.org>
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=-10.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,
	SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham 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 8C5D1C432BE
	for <linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 19:45:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18])
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6356560F58
	for <linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 19:45:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S231217AbhH0TqD (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 27 Aug 2021 15:46:03 -0400
Received: from mga17.intel.com ([192.55.52.151]:52492 "EHLO mga17.intel.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S230437AbhH0TqC (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 27 Aug 2021 15:46:02 -0400
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10089"; a="198256558"
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.84,357,1620716400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="198256558"
Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58])
  by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Aug 2021 12:45:12 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.84,357,1620716400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="465548314"
Received: from ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com ([172.25.110.23])
  by orsmga007.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 27 Aug 2021 12:45:12 -0700
Date:   Fri, 27 Aug 2021 12:45:03 -0700
From:   Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
To:     Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc:     "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
        Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
        Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri@intel.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>,
        "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@intel.com>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] sched/fair: Consider SMT in ASYM_PACKING load
 balance
Message-ID: <20210827194503.GB14720@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com>
References: <20210810144145.18776-1-ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
 <20210810144145.18776-7-ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
 <CAKfTPtArtmhLG5QYR6TzKevDrEuiQu2HJxm_C3pe549XdGU-1g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtArtmhLG5QYR6TzKevDrEuiQu2HJxm_C3pe549XdGU-1g@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 12:13:42PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Aug 2021 at 16:41, Ricardo Neri
> <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > @@ -9540,6 +9629,12 @@ static struct rq *find_busiest_queue(struct lb_env *env,
> >                     nr_running == 1)
> >                         continue;
> >
> > +               /* Make sure we only pull tasks from a CPU of lower priority */
> > +               if ((env->sd->flags & SD_ASYM_PACKING) &&
> > +                   sched_asym_prefer(i, env->dst_cpu) &&
> > +                   nr_running == 1)
> > +                       continue;
> 
> This really looks similar to the test above for SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY.
> More generally speaking SD_ASYM_PACKING and SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY share
> a lot of common policy and I wonder if at some point we could not
> merge their behavior in LB

I would like to confirm with you that you are not expecting this merge
as part of this series, right?

Thanks and BR,
Ricardo