All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: vincent.donnefort@arm.com
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com,
	vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, patrick.bellasi@matbug.net,
	valentin.schneider@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Fix task utilization accountability in cpu_util_next()
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 10:11:03 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YDODN1rnTqfTQOug@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210222095401.37158-1-vincent.donnefort@arm.com>

Hey Vincent,

On Monday 22 Feb 2021 at 09:54:01 (+0000), vincent.donnefort@arm.com wrote:
> From: Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>
> 
> Currently, cpu_util_next() estimates the CPU utilization as follows:
> 
>   max(cpu_util + task_util,
>       cpu_util_est + task_util_est)

s/task_util_est/_task_util_est

This is an important difference.

> 
> This is an issue when making a comparison between CPUs, as the task
> contribution can be either:
> 
>   (1) task_util_est, on a mostly idle CPU, where cpu_util is close to 0
>       and task_util_est > cpu_util.
>   (2) task_util, on a mostly busy CPU, where cpu_util > task_util_est.

I don't understand how this is an issue, this is by design with util-est
no?

Note that cpu_util_next() tries to accurately predict what cpu_util(@cpu)
will be once @p is enqueued on @dst_cpu. There should be no policy
decision here, we just reproduce the enqueue aggreagation -- see
util_est_enqueue() and cpu_util().

Could you please give an example where you think cpu_util_next()
computes the wrong value?

Thanks,
Quentin

  reply	other threads:[~2021-02-22 10:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-02-22  9:54 [PATCH] sched/fair: Fix task utilization accountability in cpu_util_next() vincent.donnefort
2021-02-22 10:11 ` Quentin Perret [this message]
2021-02-22 11:36   ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-02-22 12:23     ` Quentin Perret
2021-02-22 15:01       ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-02-22 15:58         ` Quentin Perret
2021-02-22 16:23           ` Quentin Perret
2021-02-22 16:39             ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-02-22 16:43               ` Quentin Perret
2021-02-23 14:47             ` Dietmar Eggemann
2021-02-22 16:31           ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-02-22 16:35             ` Quentin Perret
2021-02-23 14:44 ` Dietmar Eggemann

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=YDODN1rnTqfTQOug@google.com \
    --to=qperret@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=patrick.bellasi@matbug.net \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --cc=vincent.donnefort@arm.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.