linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] sched/topology: remove smt_gain
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 11:21:29 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKfTPtBHvRWzWj_CdB064YssDu05SijnZnTPzWovE-43sdeWZg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180905111436.GB57420@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 at 13:14, Srikar Dronamraju
<srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> * Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> [2018-09-05 11:11:35]:
>
> > On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 at 10:50, Srikar Dronamraju
> > <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > * Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> [2018-09-05 09:36:42]:
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I dont know of any systems that have come with single threaded and
> > > > > multithreaded. However some user can still offline few threads in a core
> > > > > while leaving other cores untouched. I dont really know why somebody
> > > > > would want to do it.  For example, some customer was toying with SMT 3
> > > > > mode in a SMT 8 power8 box.
> > > >
> > > > In this case, it means that we have the same core capacity whatever
> > > > the number of CPUs
> > > > and a core with SMT 3 will be set with the same compute capacity as
> > > > the core with SMT 8.
> > > > Does it still make sense ?
> > > >
> > >
> > > To me it make sense atleast from  a power 8 perspective, because SMT 1 >
> > > SMT 2 > SMT 4 > SMT8. So if one core is configured for SMT 2 and other
> > > core is configured for SMT4; all threads being busy, the  individual
> > > threads running on SMT2 core will complete more work than SMT 4 core
> > > threads.
> >
> > I agree for individual thread capacity but at core group level, the
> > core SMT 1 will have the same capacity as core group SMT 8 so load
> > balance will try to balance evenly the tasks between the 2 cores
> > whereas core SMT 8 > core SMT1 , isn't it ?
> >
>
> I believe that Core capacity irrespective of the number of threads
> should be similar. We wanted to give a small benefit if the core has
> multiple threads and that was smt_gain. Lets say we have 8 equal sw
> threads running on 2 cores; one being SMT 2 and other being SMT4.
> then 4 threads should be spread to each core. So that we would be fair
> to each of the 8 SW threads.

Do you mean that it would be the same with SMT 2 and SMT 8 ?
evenly spread the 8 SW threads between the 2 cores would be better
than 2 SW threads on core SMT 2 and 6 on core SMT8

>
> --
> Thanks and Regards
> Srikar Dronamraju
>

  reply	other threads:[~2018-09-06  9:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-08-29 13:19 [PATCH 0/4] sched/numa: remove unused code Vincent Guittot
2018-08-29 13:19 ` [PATCH 1/4] sched/numa: remove unused code from update_numa_stats() Vincent Guittot
2018-09-04  6:39   ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-09-10 10:19   ` [tip:sched/core] sched/numa: Remove " tip-bot for Vincent Guittot
2018-08-29 13:19 ` [PATCH 2/4] sched/numa: remove unused nr_running field Vincent Guittot
2018-09-04  6:40   ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-09-10 10:20   ` [tip:sched/core] sched/numa: Remove unused numa_stats::nr_running field tip-bot for Vincent Guittot
2018-08-29 13:19 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] sched/topology: remove smt_gain Vincent Guittot
2018-08-29 14:08   ` Qais Yousef
2018-08-29 14:42     ` Vincent Guittot
2018-09-07 12:42     ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-10 11:23       ` Qais Yousef
2018-09-04  8:24   ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-09-04  9:36     ` Vincent Guittot
2018-09-04 10:37       ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-09-05  7:36         ` Vincent Guittot
2018-09-05  8:50           ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-09-05  9:11             ` Vincent Guittot
2018-09-05 11:14               ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-09-06  9:21                 ` Vincent Guittot [this message]
2018-09-10 11:05         ` Qais Yousef
2018-09-10 10:07       ` [tip:sched/core] sched/fair: Fix scale_rt_capacity() for SMT tip-bot for Vincent Guittot
2018-12-11 15:31   ` [tip:sched/core] sched/topology: Remove the ::smt_gain field from 'struct sched_domain' tip-bot for Vincent Guittot
2018-08-29 13:19 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] sched/topology: remove unused sd param from arch_scale_cpu_capacity() Vincent Guittot

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=CAKfTPtBHvRWzWj_CdB064YssDu05SijnZnTPzWovE-43sdeWZg@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.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).