From: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
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,
bristot@redhat.com, vschneid@redhat.com, gautham.shenoy@amd.com,
kprateek.nayak@amd.com, aaron.lu@intel.com, clm@meta.com,
tj@kernel.org, roman.gushchin@linux.dev, kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: [PATCH v2 3/7] sched: Check cpu_active() earlier in newidle_balance()
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2023 15:03:38 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230710200342.358255-4-void@manifault.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230710200342.358255-1-void@manifault.com>
In newidle_balance(), we check if the current CPU is inactive, and then
decline to pull any remote tasks to the core if so. Before this check,
however, we're currently updating rq->idle_stamp. If a core is offline,
setting its idle stamp is not useful. The core won't be chosen by any
task in select_task_rq_fair(), and setting the rq->idle_stamp is
misleading anyways given that the core being inactive should imply that
it should have a very cold cache.
Let's set rq->idle_stamp in newidle_balance() only if the cpu is active.
Signed-off-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
---
kernel/sched/fair.c | 12 ++++++------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index a80a73909dc2..6e882b7bf5b4 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -11837,18 +11837,18 @@ static int newidle_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
if (this_rq->ttwu_pending)
return 0;
- /*
- * 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);
-
/*
* Do not pull tasks towards !active CPUs...
*/
if (!cpu_active(this_cpu))
return 0;
+ /*
+ * 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);
+
/*
* This is OK, because current is on_cpu, which avoids it being picked
* for load-balance and preemption/IRQs are still disabled avoiding
--
2.40.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-10 20:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-10 20:03 [PATCH v2 0/7] sched: Implement shared runqueue in CFS David Vernet
2023-07-10 20:03 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] sched: Expose move_queued_task() from core.c David Vernet
2023-07-10 20:03 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] sched: Move is_cpu_allowed() into sched.h David Vernet
2023-07-10 20:03 ` David Vernet [this message]
2023-07-10 20:03 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] sched/fair: Add SHARED_RUNQ sched feature and skeleton calls David Vernet
2023-07-11 9:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-07-11 16:19 ` David Vernet
2023-07-12 8:39 ` Abel Wu
2023-07-12 21:34 ` David Vernet
2023-07-10 20:03 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] sched: Implement shared runqueue in CFS David Vernet
2023-07-11 10:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-07-11 16:26 ` David Vernet
2023-07-12 6:00 ` Gautham R. Shenoy
2023-07-12 19:13 ` David Vernet
2023-07-12 10:47 ` Abel Wu
2023-07-12 22:16 ` David Vernet
2023-07-13 3:43 ` Abel Wu
2023-07-13 4:05 ` David Vernet
2023-07-13 7:58 ` Aaron Lu
2023-07-13 8:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-07-10 20:03 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] sched: Shard per-LLC shared runqueues David Vernet
2023-07-11 10:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-07-11 19:57 ` David Vernet
2023-07-12 10:06 ` Gautham R. Shenoy
2023-07-12 12:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-07-10 20:03 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] sched: Move shared_runq to __{enqueue,dequeue}_entity() David Vernet
2023-07-11 10:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-07-11 16:30 ` David Vernet
2023-07-11 11:42 ` [PATCH v2 0/7] sched: Implement shared runqueue in CFS Peter Zijlstra
2023-07-11 21:33 ` David Vernet
2023-07-21 9:12 ` Gautham R. Shenoy
2023-07-25 20:22 ` David Vernet
2023-08-02 6:32 ` Gautham R. Shenoy
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=20230710200342.358255-4-void@manifault.com \
--to=void@manifault.com \
--cc=aaron.lu@intel.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=clm@meta.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.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.