From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:THERMAL" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
Steve Muckle <smuckle@google.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: schedutil: update only with all info available
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 18:10:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKfTPtDjyjC5R7bhjGxhV8BN5J+LdzJmMgwaaVuE9ypvcSKapA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180411160000.GO4082@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 11 April 2018 at 18:00, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 05:41:24PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>> Yes. and to be honest I don't have any clues of the root cause :-(
>> Heiner mentioned that it's much better in latest linux-next but I
>> haven't seen any changes related to the code of those patches
>
> Yeah, it's a bit of a puzzle. Now you touch nohz, and the patches in
> next that are most likely to have affected this are rjw's
> cpuidle-vs-nohz patches. The common demoninator being nohz.
>
> Now I think rjw's patches will ensure we enter nohz _less_, they avoid
> stopping the tick when we expect to go idle for a short period only.
>
> So if your patch makes nohz go wobbly, going nohz less will make that
> better.
>
> Of course, I've no actual clue as to what that patch (it's the last one
> in the series, right?:
>
> 31e77c93e432 ("sched/fair: Update blocked load when newly idle")
>
> ) does that is so offensive to that one machine. You never did manage to
> reproduce, right?
yes
>
> Could is be that for some reason the nohz balancer now takes a very long
> time to run?
Heiner mentions that is was a relatively slow celeron and he uses
ondemand governor. So I was about to ask him to use performance
governor to see if it can be because cpu runs slow and takes too muche
time to enter idle
>
> Could something like the following happen (and this is really flaky
> thinking here):
>
> last CPU goes idle, we enter idle_balance(), that kicks ilb, ilb runs,
> which somehow again triggers idle_balance and around we go?
>
> I'm not immediately seeing how that could happen, but if we do something
> daft like that we can tie up the CPU for a while, mostly with IRQs
> disabled, and that would be visible as that latency he sees.
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-11 16:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-06 17:28 [PATCH] sched/fair: schedutil: update only with all info available Patrick Bellasi
2018-04-06 23:48 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-10 11:44 ` Patrick Bellasi
2018-04-09 8:51 ` Vincent Guittot
2018-04-10 11:04 ` Patrick Bellasi
2018-04-11 6:57 ` Vincent Guittot
2018-04-11 10:15 ` Patrick Bellasi
2018-04-11 11:56 ` Vincent Guittot
2018-04-11 14:33 ` Patrick Bellasi
2018-04-11 21:34 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-12 7:01 ` Vincent Guittot
2018-04-12 18:06 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-11 15:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-11 15:29 ` Vincent Guittot
2018-04-11 15:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-11 15:41 ` Vincent Guittot
2018-04-11 16:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-11 16:10 ` Vincent Guittot [this message]
2018-04-11 16:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-11 16:51 ` Vincent Guittot
2018-04-26 11:15 ` Patrick Bellasi
2018-04-26 11:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-11 7:57 ` Vincent Guittot
2018-04-11 9:27 ` Patrick Bellasi
2018-04-11 14:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=CAKfTPtDjyjC5R7bhjGxhV8BN5J+LdzJmMgwaaVuE9ypvcSKapA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=joelaf@google.com \
--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=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=smuckle@google.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
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).