LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
To: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:THERMAL" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
	Chris Redpath <chris.redpath@arm.com>,
	Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>,
	Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
	Thara Gopinath <thara.gopinath@linaro.org>,
	viresh kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
	"Cc: Steve Muckle" <smuckle@google.com>,
	adharmap@quicinc.com, "Kannan, Saravana" <skannan@quicinc.com>,
	pkondeti@codeaurora.org, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@gmail.com>,
	Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
	currojerez@riseup.net, Javi Merino <javi.merino@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 09/14] sched: Add over-utilization/tipping point indicator
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2018 16:21:41 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKfTPtDckchB-CiRUzKVd906SBr1OKLuTfBqD5vsaR6CZZHu6Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtDkJY=JYicZk8sM9_mJ-iq+Jwse0oVRbW=wpxXKKnEoeQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 15:49, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 10:18, Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Friday 03 Aug 2018 at 09:48:47 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 18:59, Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> wrote:
> > > I'm not really concerned about re-enabling load balance but more that
> > > the effort of packing of tasks in few cpus/clusters that EAS tries to
> > > do can be broken for every new task.
> >
> > Well, re-enabling load balance immediately would break the nice placement
> > that EAS found, because it would shuffle all tasks around and break the
> > packing strategy. Letting that sole new task go in find_idlest_cpu()
>
> Sorry I was not clear in my explanation. Re enabling load balance
> would be a problem of course. I wanted to say that there is few chance
> that this will re-enable the load balance immediately and break EAS
> and I'm not worried by this case. But i'm only concerned by the new
> task being put outside EAS policy.
>
> For example, if you run on hikey960 the simple script below, which
> can't really be seen as a fork bomb IMHO, you will see threads
> scheduled on big cores every 0.5 seconds whereas everything should be
> packed on little core  :
> for i in {0..10}; do
> echo "t"$i
> sleep 0.5
> done
>
> > shouldn't impact the placement of existing tasks. That might have an energy
> > cost for that one task, yes, but it's really hard to do anything smarter
> > with new tasks IMO ... EAS simply can't work without a utilization value.
> >
> > > So I wonder what is better for EAS : Make sure to efficiently spread
> > > newly created tasks in cas of fork bomb or  try to not break EAS task
> > > placement with every newly created tasks
> >
> > That shouldn't break the placement per se, we're just making one
> > temporary exception for new tasks. What do you think 'the right thing'
> > to do is ? To just put new tasks on prev_cpu or something like that ?
>
> I think that EAS, which is about saving power, could be a bit power
> friendly when it has to make some assumptions about new task.
>
> >
> > That might help some use-cases I suppose, but will probably harm others ...
> > I'm just not too keen on making assumptions about the size of new tasks,
>
> But you are already doing some assumptions by letting the default
> mode, which use load_avg, selecting the task for you. The comment of

s/selecting the task/selecting the cpu/

> the init function of load_avg states:
>
> void init_entity_runnable_average()
> {
> ...
> /*
> * Tasks are intialized with full load to be seen as heavy tasks until
> * they get a chance to stabilize to their real load level.
> * Group entities are intialized with zero load to reflect the fact that
> * nothing has been attached to the task group yet.
> */
>
> So it means that EAS makes the assumption that new task are heavy
> tasks until they get a chance to stabilize
>
> Regards,
> Vincent
>
> > that's all. But I'm definitely open to ideas if there is something
> > smarter we can do.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Quentin

  reply index

Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-07-24 12:25 [PATCH v5 00/14] Energy Aware Scheduling Quentin Perret
2018-07-24 12:25 ` [PATCH v5 01/14] sched: Relocate arch_scale_cpu_capacity Quentin Perret
2018-07-24 12:25 ` [PATCH v5 02/14] sched/cpufreq: Factor out utilization to frequency mapping Quentin Perret
2018-07-24 12:25 ` [PATCH v5 03/14] PM: Introduce an Energy Model management framework Quentin Perret
2018-08-09 21:52   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-08-10  8:15     ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-10  8:41       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-08-10  9:12         ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-10 11:13           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-08-10 12:30             ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-12  9:49               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-07-24 12:25 ` [PATCH v5 04/14] PM / EM: Expose the Energy Model in sysfs Quentin Perret
2018-07-24 12:25 ` [PATCH v5 05/14] sched/topology: Reference the Energy Model of CPUs when available Quentin Perret
2018-07-24 12:25 ` [PATCH v5 06/14] sched/topology: Lowest energy aware balancing sched_domain level pointer Quentin Perret
2018-07-26 16:00   ` Valentin Schneider
2018-07-26 17:01     ` Quentin Perret
2018-07-24 12:25 ` [PATCH v5 07/14] sched/topology: Introduce sched_energy_present static key Quentin Perret
2018-07-24 12:25 ` [PATCH v5 08/14] sched/fair: Clean-up update_sg_lb_stats parameters Quentin Perret
2018-07-24 12:25 ` [PATCH v5 09/14] sched: Add over-utilization/tipping point indicator Quentin Perret
2018-08-02 12:26   ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-08-02 13:03     ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-02 13:08       ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-08-02 13:18         ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-02 13:48           ` Vincent Guittot
2018-08-02 14:14             ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-02 15:14               ` Vincent Guittot
2018-08-02 15:30                 ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-02 15:55                   ` Vincent Guittot
2018-08-02 16:00                     ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-02 16:07                       ` Vincent Guittot
2018-08-02 16:10                         ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-02 16:38                           ` Vincent Guittot
2018-08-02 16:59                             ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-03  7:48                               ` Vincent Guittot
2018-08-03  8:18                                 ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-03 13:49                                   ` Vincent Guittot
2018-08-03 14:21                                     ` Vincent Guittot [this message]
2018-08-03 15:55                                     ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-06  8:40                                       ` Vincent Guittot
2018-08-06  9:43                                         ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-06 10:45                                           ` Vincent Guittot
2018-08-06 11:02                                             ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-06 10:08                                         ` Dietmar Eggemann
2018-08-06 10:33                                           ` Vincent Guittot
2018-08-06 12:29                                             ` Dietmar Eggemann
2018-08-06 12:37                                               ` Vincent Guittot
2018-08-06 13:20                                                 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2018-08-09  9:30   ` Vincent Guittot
2018-08-09  9:38     ` Quentin Perret
2018-07-24 12:25 ` [PATCH v5 10/14] sched/cpufreq: Refactor the utilization aggregation method Quentin Perret
2018-07-30 19:35   ` skannan
2018-07-31  7:59     ` Quentin Perret
2018-07-31 19:31       ` skannan
2018-08-01  7:32         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-08-01  8:23           ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-01  8:35             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-08-01  9:23               ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-01  9:40                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-08-02 13:04                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-08-02 15:39                   ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-03 13:04                     ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-02 12:33     ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-08-02 12:45       ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-08-02 15:21         ` Quentin Perret
2018-08-02 17:36           ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-08-03 12:42             ` Quentin Perret
2018-07-24 12:25 ` [PATCH v5 11/14] sched/fair: Introduce an energy estimation helper function Quentin Perret
2018-07-24 12:25 ` [PATCH v5 12/14] sched/fair: Select an energy-efficient CPU on task wake-up Quentin Perret
2018-08-02 13:54   ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-08-02 16:21     ` Quentin Perret
2018-07-24 12:25 ` [PATCH v5 13/14] OPTIONAL: arch_topology: Start Energy Aware Scheduling Quentin Perret
2018-07-24 12:25 ` [PATCH v5 14/14] OPTIONAL: cpufreq: dt: Register an Energy Model Quentin Perret

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=CAKfTPtDckchB-CiRUzKVd906SBr1OKLuTfBqD5vsaR6CZZHu6Q@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=adharmap@quicinc.com \
    --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=quentin.perret@arm.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=skannan@quicinc.com \
    --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=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

LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/0 lkml/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1 lkml/git/1.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/2 lkml/git/2.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/3 lkml/git/3.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/4 lkml/git/4.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/5 lkml/git/5.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/6 lkml/git/6.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7 lkml/git/7.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 lkml lkml/ https://lore.kernel.org/lkml \
		linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index lkml


Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox