From: Qais Yousef <qyousef@layalina.io>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>,
Wei Wang <wvw@google.com>, Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan94@gmail.com>,
Hank <han.lin@mediatek.com>,
Jonathan JMChen <Jonathan.JMChen@mediatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched/uclamp: Set max_spare_cap_cpu even if max_spare_cap is 0
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 19:24:54 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230130192454.ohau23v74agz7nol@airbuntu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtCstN-oJ=UsDJrwacj8fm_cq-5N3LAWc_zz32E2FCJgBg@mail.gmail.com>
On 01/30/23 15:44, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 at 17:14, Qais Yousef <qyousef@layalina.io> wrote:
> >
> > When uclamp_max is being used, the util of the task could be higher than
> > the spare capacity of the CPU, but due to uclamp_max value we force fit
> > it there.
> >
> > The way the condition for checking for max_spare_cap in
> > find_energy_efficient_cpu() was constructed; it ignored any CPU that has
> > its spare_cap less than or _equal_ to max_spare_cap. Since we initialize
> > max_spare_cap to 0; this lead to never setting max_spare_cap_cpu and
> > hence ending up never performing compute_energy() for this cluster and
> > missing an opportunity for a better energy efficient placement to honour
> > uclamp_max setting.
> >
> > max_spare_cap = 0;
> > cpu_cap = capacity_of(cpu) - task_util(p); // 0 if task_util(p) is high
> >
> > ...
> >
> > util_fits_cpu(...); // will return true if uclamp_max forces it to fit
> >
> > ...
> >
> > // this logic will fail to update max_spare_cap_cpu if cpu_cap is 0
> > if (cpu_cap > max_spare_cap) {
> > max_spare_cap = cpu_cap;
> > max_spare_cap_cpu = cpu;
> > }
> >
> > prev_spare_cap suffers from a similar problem.
> >
> > Fix the logic by treating -1UL value as 'not populated' instead of
> > 0 which is a viable and correct spare capacity value.
> >
> > Fixes: 1d42509e475c ("sched/fair: Make EAS wakeup placement consider uclamp restrictions")
> > Signed-off-by: Qais Yousef (Google) <qyousef@layalina.io>
> > ---
> > kernel/sched/fair.c | 14 ++++++++------
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > index e29e9ea4cde8..ca2c389d3180 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > @@ -7390,9 +7390,9 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu)
> > for (; pd; pd = pd->next) {
> > unsigned long util_min = p_util_min, util_max = p_util_max;
> > unsigned long cpu_cap, cpu_thermal_cap, util;
> > - unsigned long cur_delta, max_spare_cap = 0;
> > + unsigned long cur_delta, max_spare_cap = -1UL;
> > unsigned long rq_util_min, rq_util_max;
> > - unsigned long prev_spare_cap = 0;
> > + unsigned long prev_spare_cap = -1UL;
> > int max_spare_cap_cpu = -1;
> > unsigned long base_energy;
> > int fits, max_fits = -1;
> > @@ -7457,7 +7457,8 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu)
> > prev_spare_cap = cpu_cap;
> > prev_fits = fits;
> > } else if ((fits > max_fits) ||
> > - ((fits == max_fits) && (cpu_cap > max_spare_cap))) {
> > + ((fits == max_fits) &&
> > + (cpu_cap > max_spare_cap || max_spare_cap == -1UL) {
>
> Can't we use a signed comparison to include the case of max_spare_cap
> == -1 in cpu_cap > max_spare_cap ?
By converting max_spare_cap to long, right?
My memory could be failing me, but I seem to remember we had mixed usage and
consolidated into unsigned long. That's why I didn't want to break the trend.
Anyway. If no one shouts against that, I don't mind going for that.
Thanks
--
Qais Yousef
>
> > /*
> > * Find the CPU with the maximum spare capacity
> > * among the remaining CPUs in the performance
> > @@ -7469,7 +7470,7 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > - if (max_spare_cap_cpu < 0 && prev_spare_cap == 0)
> > + if (max_spare_cap_cpu < 0 && prev_spare_cap == -1UL)
> > continue;
> >
> > eenv_pd_busy_time(&eenv, cpus, p);
> > @@ -7477,7 +7478,7 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu)
> > base_energy = compute_energy(&eenv, pd, cpus, p, -1);
> >
> > /* Evaluate the energy impact of using prev_cpu. */
> > - if (prev_spare_cap > 0) {
> > + if (prev_spare_cap != -1UL) {
> > prev_delta = compute_energy(&eenv, pd, cpus, p,
> > prev_cpu);
> > /* CPU utilization has changed */
> > @@ -7489,7 +7490,8 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu)
> > }
> >
> > /* Evaluate the energy impact of using max_spare_cap_cpu. */
> > - if (max_spare_cap_cpu >= 0 && max_spare_cap > prev_spare_cap) {
> > + if (max_spare_cap_cpu >= 0 &&
> > + (max_spare_cap > prev_spare_cap || prev_spare_cap == -1UL)) {
> > /* Current best energy cpu fits better */
> > if (max_fits < best_fits)
> > continue;
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-30 19:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-29 16:14 [PATCH 0/3] Fix a couple of corner cases in feec() when using uclamp_max Qais Yousef
2023-01-29 16:14 ` [PATCH 1/3] sched/uclamp: Set max_spare_cap_cpu even if max_spare_cap is 0 Qais Yousef
2023-01-29 20:03 ` Qais Yousef
2023-01-30 14:44 ` Vincent Guittot
2023-01-30 19:24 ` Qais Yousef [this message]
2023-01-29 16:14 ` [PATCH 2/3] sched/uclamp: Ignore (util == 0) optimization in feec() when p_util_max = 0 Qais Yousef
2023-01-29 16:14 ` [PATCH 3/3] sched/tp: Add new tracepoint to track compute energy computation 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=20230130192454.ohau23v74agz7nol@airbuntu \
--to=qyousef@layalina.io \
--cc=Jonathan.JMChen@mediatek.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=han.lin@mediatek.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukasz.luba@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=wvw@google.com \
--cc=xuewen.yan94@gmail.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 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).