All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, pjt@google.com,
	bsegall@google.com, Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] sched: Move idle_stamp up to the core
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 13:58:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140123125822.GX31570@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140121112258.410353740@infradead.org>

On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 12:17:57PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
> 
> The idle_balance modifies the idle_stamp field of the rq, making this
> information to be shared across core.c and fair.c. As we can know if the
> cpu is going to idle or not with the previous patch, let's encapsulate the
> idle_stamp information in core.c by moving it up to the caller. The
> idle_balance function returns true in case a balancing occured and the cpu
> won't be idle, false if no balance happened and the cpu is going idle.
> 
> Cc: alex.shi@linaro.org
> Cc: peterz@infradead.org
> Cc: mingo@kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1389949444-14821-3-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org
> ---
>  kernel/sched/core.c  |    2 +-
>  kernel/sched/fair.c  |   14 ++++++--------
>  kernel/sched/sched.h |    2 +-
>  3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -2680,7 +2680,7 @@ static void __sched __schedule(void)
>  	pre_schedule(rq, prev);
>  
>  	if (unlikely(!rq->nr_running))
> -		idle_balance(rq);
> +		rq->idle_stamp = idle_balance(rq) ? 0 : rq_clock(rq);

OK, spotted a problem here..

So previously idle_stamp was set _before_ actually doing idle_balance(),
and that was RIGHT, because that way we include the cost of actually
doing idle_balance() into the idle time.

By not including the cost of idle_balance() you underestimate the 'idle'
time in that if idle_balance() filled the entire idle time we account 0
idle, even though we had 'plenty' of time to run the entire thing.

This leads to not running idle_balance() even though we have the time
for it.

So we very much want something like:


  if (!rq->nr_running)
  	rq->idle_stamp = rq_clock(rq);

  p = pick_next_task(rq, prev);

  if (!is_idle_task(p))
  	rq->idle_stamp = 0;



  reply	other threads:[~2014-01-23 12:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-01-21 11:17 [PATCH 0/9] Various sched patches Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 11:17 ` [PATCH 1/9] sched: Remove cpu parameter for idle_balance() Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 11:17 ` [PATCH 2/9] sched: Fix race in idle_balance() Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 11:17 ` [PATCH 3/9] sched: Move idle_stamp up to the core Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-23 12:58   ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2014-01-23 14:39     ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-01-23 15:23       ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 11:17 ` [PATCH 4/9] sched: Clean up idle task SMP logic Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 17:27   ` Vincent Guittot
2014-01-23 11:37     ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-23 14:52       ` Vincent Guittot
2014-01-21 11:17 ` [PATCH 5/9] sched/fair: Track cgroup depth Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 11:18 ` [PATCH 6/9] sched: Push put_prev_task() into pick_next_task() Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 21:46   ` bsegall
2014-01-21 11:18 ` [PATCH 7/9] sched/fair: Clean up __clear_buddies_* Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 11:18 ` [PATCH 8/9] sched/fair: Optimize cgroup pick_next_task_fair Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 19:24   ` bsegall
2014-01-21 19:37     ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 20:03       ` bsegall
2014-01-21 20:43         ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 21:43           ` bsegall
2014-01-22 18:06             ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 11:18 ` [PATCH 9/9] sched: Use idle task shortcut Peter Zijlstra
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-01-28 17:16 [PATCH 0/9] Various sched patches -v2 Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-28 17:16 ` [PATCH 3/9] sched: Move idle_stamp up to the core 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=20140123125822.GX31570@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=pjt@google.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 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.