From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Qi Zheng <arch0.zheng@gmail.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/core: add unlikely in group_has_capacity()
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 16:45:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200806144533.GA2123716@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200730135423.232776-1-arch0.zheng@gmail.com>
* Qi Zheng <arch0.zheng@gmail.com> wrote:
> 1. The group_has_capacity() function is only called in
> group_classify().
> 2. Before calling the group_has_capacity() function,
> group_is_overloaded() will first judge the following
> formula, if it holds, the group_classify() will directly
> return the group_overloaded.
>
> (sgs->group_capacity * imbalance_pct) <
> (sgs->group_runnable * 100)
>
> Therefore, when the group_has_capacity() is called, the
> probability that the above formalu holds is very small. Hint
> compilers about that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Qi Zheng <arch0.zheng@gmail.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 2ba8f230feb9..9074fd5e23b2 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -8234,8 +8234,8 @@ group_has_capacity(unsigned int imbalance_pct, struct sg_lb_stats *sgs)
> if (sgs->sum_nr_running < sgs->group_weight)
> return true;
>
> - if ((sgs->group_capacity * imbalance_pct) <
> - (sgs->group_runnable * 100))
> + if (unlikely((sgs->group_capacity * imbalance_pct) <
> + (sgs->group_runnable * 100)))
> return false;
Isn't the probability that this second check will match around 0%?
I.e. wouldn't the right fix be to remove the duplicate check from
group_has_capacity(), because it's already been checked in
group_classify()? Maybe while leaving a comment in place?
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-06 16:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-30 13:54 [PATCH] sched/core: add unlikely in group_has_capacity() Qi Zheng
2020-08-06 14:45 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2020-08-07 2:47 ` Qi Zheng
2020-08-12 1:49 ` Qi Zheng
2020-08-17 8:18 ` 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=20200806144533.GA2123716@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=arch0.zheng@gmail.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--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.