From: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, alex.shi@linaro.org, efault@gmx.de,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, morten.rasmussen@arm.com,
aswin@hp.com, chegu_vinod@hp.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched, balancing: Update rq->max_idle_balance_cost whenever newidle balance is attempted
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 12:54:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1398455654.2102.29.camel@j-VirtualBox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140425094331.GF26782@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 11:43 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> So how about something like this? It tracks the minimal next_balance for
> whatever domains we do visit, or the very bottom domain in the
> insta-bail case (but yeah, Mike's got a point.. we could think of
> removing that).
>
> The thought is that since the higher domains have larger intervals
> anyway, its less likely they will move the timer back often, so skipping
> them is not that big a deal.
>
> I also considered tracking next_busy_balance and using that when
> pulled_task, but I decided against it (after I'd actually written the
> code to do so). We were on the brink of going idle, that's really not
> busy.
Preeti mentioned that sd->balance_interval is changed during load_balance().
Should we also consider updating the interval in rebalance_domains() after
calling load_balance(), and also taking max_load_balance_interval into account
in the updates for next_balance in idle_balance()?
If so, how about the something like the below change which also introduces
get_sd_balance_interval() to obtain the sd's balance interval, and have both
update_next_balance() and rebalance_domains() use that function.
Signed-off-by: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
---
kernel/sched/fair.c | 81 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
1 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 43232b8..09c546c 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -6645,27 +6645,59 @@ out:
return ld_moved;
}
+static inline unsigned long get_sd_balance_interval(struct sched_domain *sd, int busy)
+{
+ unsigned long interval = sd->balance_interval;
+
+ if (busy)
+ interval *= sd->busy_factor;
+
+ /* scale ms to jiffies */
+ interval = msecs_to_jiffies(interval);
+ interval = clamp(interval, 1UL, max_load_balance_interval);
+
+ return interval;
+}
+
+static inline void
+update_next_balance(struct sched_domain *sd, int busy, unsigned long *next_balance)
+{
+ unsigned long interval, next;
+
+ interval = get_sd_balance_interval(sd, busy);
+ next = sd->last_balance + interval;
+
+ if (time_after(*next_balance, next))
+ *next_balance = next;
+}
+
/*
* idle_balance is called by schedule() if this_cpu is about to become
* idle. Attempts to pull tasks from other CPUs.
*/
static int idle_balance(struct rq *this_rq)
{
+ unsigned long next_balance = jiffies + HZ;
+ int this_cpu = this_rq->cpu;
struct sched_domain *sd;
int pulled_task = 0;
- unsigned long next_balance = jiffies + HZ;
u64 curr_cost = 0;
- int this_cpu = this_rq->cpu;
idle_enter_fair(this_rq);
+
/*
* We must set idle_stamp _before_ calling idle_balance(), such that we
* measure the duration of idle_balance() as idle time.
*/
this_rq->idle_stamp = rq_clock(this_rq);
- if (this_rq->avg_idle < sysctl_sched_migration_cost)
+ if (this_rq->avg_idle < sysctl_sched_migration_cost) {
+ rcu_read_lock();
+ sd = rcu_dereference_check_sched_domain(this_rq->sd);
+ update_next_balance(sd, 0, &next_balance);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
goto out;
+ }
/*
* Drop the rq->lock, but keep IRQ/preempt disabled.
@@ -6675,15 +6707,16 @@ static int idle_balance(struct rq *this_rq)
update_blocked_averages(this_cpu);
rcu_read_lock();
for_each_domain(this_cpu, sd) {
- unsigned long interval;
int continue_balancing = 1;
u64 t0, domain_cost;
if (!(sd->flags & SD_LOAD_BALANCE))
continue;
- if (this_rq->avg_idle < curr_cost + sd->max_newidle_lb_cost)
+ if (this_rq->avg_idle < curr_cost + sd->max_newidle_lb_cost) {
+ update_next_balance(sd, 0, &next_balance);
break;
+ }
if (sd->flags & SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE) {
t0 = sched_clock_cpu(this_cpu);
@@ -6700,9 +6733,7 @@ static int idle_balance(struct rq *this_rq)
curr_cost += domain_cost;
}
- interval = msecs_to_jiffies(sd->balance_interval);
- if (time_after(next_balance, sd->last_balance + interval))
- next_balance = sd->last_balance + interval;
+ update_next_balance(sd, 0, &next_balance);
if (pulled_task)
break;
}
@@ -6710,27 +6741,22 @@ static int idle_balance(struct rq *this_rq)
raw_spin_lock(&this_rq->lock);
+ if (curr_cost > this_rq->max_idle_balance_cost)
+ this_rq->max_idle_balance_cost = curr_cost;
+
/*
- * While browsing the domains, we released the rq lock.
- * A task could have be enqueued in the meantime
+ * While browsing the domains, we released the rq lock, a task could
+ * have be enqueued in the meantime. Since we're not going idle,
+ * pretend we pulled a task.
*/
- if (this_rq->cfs.h_nr_running && !pulled_task) {
+ if (this_rq->cfs.h_nr_running && !pulled_task)
pulled_task = 1;
- goto out;
- }
- if (pulled_task || time_after(jiffies, this_rq->next_balance)) {
- /*
- * We are going idle. next_balance may be set based on
- * a busy processor. So reset next_balance.
- */
+out:
+ /* Move the next balance forward */
+ if (time_after(this_rq->next_balance, next_balance))
this_rq->next_balance = next_balance;
- }
-
- if (curr_cost > this_rq->max_idle_balance_cost)
- this_rq->max_idle_balance_cost = curr_cost;
-out:
/* Is there a task of a high priority class? */
if (this_rq->nr_running != this_rq->cfs.h_nr_running)
pulled_task = -1;
@@ -7013,13 +7039,7 @@ static void rebalance_domains(struct rq *rq, enum cpu_idle_type idle)
break;
}
- interval = sd->balance_interval;
- if (idle != CPU_IDLE)
- interval *= sd->busy_factor;
-
- /* scale ms to jiffies */
- interval = msecs_to_jiffies(interval);
- interval = clamp(interval, 1UL, max_load_balance_interval);
+ interval = get_sd_balance_interval(sd, idle != CPU_IDLE);
need_serialize = sd->flags & SD_SERIALIZE;
@@ -7038,6 +7058,7 @@ static void rebalance_domains(struct rq *rq, enum cpu_idle_type idle)
idle = idle_cpu(cpu) ? CPU_IDLE : CPU_NOT_IDLE;
}
sd->last_balance = jiffies;
+ interval = get_sd_balance_interval(sd, idle != CPU_IDLE);
}
if (need_serialize)
spin_unlock(&balancing);
--
1.7.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-25 19:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-24 1:30 [PATCH 0/3] sched: Idle balance patches Jason Low
2014-04-24 1:30 ` [PATCH 1/3] sched, balancing: Update rq->max_idle_balance_cost whenever newidle balance is attempted Jason Low
2014-04-24 10:14 ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-04-24 12:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-24 12:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-24 16:53 ` Jason Low
2014-04-24 17:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-24 17:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-24 22:18 ` Jason Low
2014-04-25 5:12 ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-04-25 7:13 ` Jason Low
2014-04-25 7:58 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-04-25 17:03 ` Jason Low
2014-04-25 5:08 ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-04-25 9:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-25 19:54 ` Jason Low [this message]
2014-04-26 14:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-28 16:42 ` Jason Low
2014-04-27 8:31 ` Preeti Murthy
2014-04-28 9:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-29 3:10 ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-04-28 18:04 ` Jason Low
2014-04-29 3:52 ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-04-24 1:30 ` [PATCH 2/3] sched: Initialize newidle balance stats in sd_numa_init() Jason Low
2014-04-24 12:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-25 5:57 ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-05-08 10:42 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/numa: " tip-bot for Jason Low
2014-04-24 1:30 ` [PATCH 3/3] sched, fair: Stop searching for tasks in newidle balance if there are runnable tasks Jason Low
2014-04-24 2:51 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-04-24 8:28 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-04-24 16:37 ` Jason Low
2014-04-24 19:07 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-04-24 7:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-24 16:43 ` Jason Low
2014-04-24 16:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-25 1:24 ` Jason Low
2014-04-25 2:45 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-04-25 3:33 ` Jason Low
2014-04-25 5:46 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-04-24 16:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-24 10:30 ` Morten Rasmussen
2014-04-24 11:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-24 14:08 ` Morten Rasmussen
2014-04-24 14:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-08 10:44 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/fair: " tip-bot for Jason Low
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=1398455654.2102.29.camel@j-VirtualBox \
--to=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=alex.shi@linaro.org \
--cc=aswin@hp.com \
--cc=chegu_vinod@hp.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.