From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=209.85.128.50 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1794254214; b=gngLSGqINsgLmMEmHKeA7B15cu72zLXYoXoIsokPW7o23fnQTtBbeQHtmVf1SfzUdIZL UrTH3sHqB0MPcGGMatdl6UFggs5idOFrpCkVsH2b6ErTD4uYrgWX4bwLBr+abaut63vX/ h5v0Bwbpkuh5Djt8ezFXqEJN6jg7Y/oJyGDMzvl2prJ4OEQ4TZ4e/rxpb8dYwI1iwZmYo +TTTCUfuiYsXIOmHFqQlYcR9f+PJAS0UvfgFn2FEUKKObR7PWB5FnQTd6fytqinFoXyxP RtpwREi8BfPrWrbZwrNx4g/uymJpR63k2V4udTgfArjeYya9zklM5wCCERRXLZGyXJw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1794254214; h=DMARC-Filter:Received:DKIM-Signature:X-Google-DKIM-Signature: X-Forwarded-Encrypted:X-Gm-Message-State:X-Gm-Gg:X-Received:Received: Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; bh=SXqdVx5FuRoJfcSZ0X9tPlMemMPV7a99j+mnsg7v/74=; b=GJozx6IATia5gxgpUow3M2ftJRklqFo3ApUHfHOXi2kxrvA/xYValJkolFBRB1uv2AMI ZYWDpAOiDTX9BcdAeSktE2qOTf32UTTkKRqlVq4B7BslXp5/Z9IriKjz26RfrDWPUT4h5 GZiWfxtTl7BFMPxr59YLSD/PYI1EybfE1fYOAsfaGm+ox3KSddz/fM/VtOv7+3w0hcAZ5 QUFVpGFDWA9Az7ugnKGFXb/+D15DTp1jIzQBmEhi7uBMKIJIPPTbLMvBS9ZQ01Ej0wD28 Fsj5VhVyOu9K1i2dZ8wDEH3/RDPHvs4TkMe7wdkImXpB1A7JEa+j0dIKMKpVIt/b68Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20260707 header.b=YfFuiDeq; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=209.85.128.50 Received: from mail-wm1-f50.google.com (mail-wm1-f50.google.com [209.85.128.50]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2C9A606A33F for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2026 19:56:53 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org E2C9A606A33F Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20260707 header.b=YfFuiDeq Received: by mail-wm1-f50.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4a5348aaba5so1333745e9.0 for ; Mon, 09 Nov 2026 11:56:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20260707; t=1794254212; x=1794859012; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=SXqdVx5FuRoJfcSZ0X9tPlMemMPV7a99j+mnsg7v/74=; b=YfFuiDeqYsSMeosoYOw4tUdhEFBvIPgwmtAzCxlKY5Zj5AUcfMS82PoccC+6AYndBe /5dZBJ0S9PubV+sgEG8Ynwx+Xk/tiqM02veupp+S9OMFd3fP5GV+B4JEklaT8vzUYUb+ Tyg8cT47GpnyOtDCk6cL3xaXrJtEKTBBF6oNbfIog+EOVSmSzO2vTwJp1C5/x2s3Fjlt hJi9FRjtzN5o8SNBugGKYtplItU7wqtnZQyXx1BxgWIcTymsVo1BMv4lvD2tTwa04wbf nDG1TwI8loTXs3ye3VMAKooHD76DzqlVTiuD228deOWp3Yo8Aa1bKsvs/gnsmDxngoDp /qOQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20260707; t=1794254212; x=1794859012; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=SXqdVx5FuRoJfcSZ0X9tPlMemMPV7a99j+mnsg7v/74=; b=k5Th4C9e899PU7jNnrZ2UO7ao66O+VhTqLFY6BKof5x9NpoP/SgiBVooRXFFcJOCo5 fMb6IT1u1/NY08zTcKGTa9vsjrPjnNnShadjtxbzYOxPZebq7ubluVl0+CNxJzg8Hi9I wfA5Ceff/FOGSA6TTgwdJwbeh3lCagJmFP3cFVrNonu0wYYAuuQqNF4K5XLU5jHeEGbd frig65EASKyLhalv1o0pImcUKQtm2AE26BmmwTwa7xms1bEZs5yA++rYz5dfpnVwpnQt E8QA9JGRbQAVX7Gpq+t5TCxoGO4sIeZnJJTKumek0M5FxjF3/Z4KNIUEM5xzk/3WE4q9 woBQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AL+hErF0bJ2P5cEFuVmMcd3lPjRyd+huMNN840Ke6YXkFLyuQtuK5rm4gsrAfaLabXp5A0eCegCQDYwvBn4=@lists.linux.dev X-Gm-Message-State: APuU4Z/ujNsLepo/suuJyI4gXraoZCkVvvsZ1XRSvvS/MdeR78IjY17V F6gA9rrE3FUWks7gZs65mXLwzGCOhKQwLaXhezy7MlBvWm8NIbEjDdzj X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou2cDlT/tLtoWHSgsDByUnSqjHfh3UxeG4DDaELlCGV2TS9U0+H/+Fvt3Zb6ngj mYgPbouG1fAkmgwlC/UjqCXyudpvIwiPi5R54T7s/tdlXHgTlXyYJjLCQcEKSI4NiVEqbl3p9qU 8MQ5PwkdT264GXeFHtsU6F7nLZXC6s+rZjHmMo+uXhEKBSjQXRASSa8xDeTZm1DBl4xAFVbmTMr lxY4xhWlMOg9zMN7luq0VgXdGqXqapXxIunkSMKD+I19AF3nuUUhNYcJ5KuaEOle/Qe+qHTOXeV V1kumP8dENQbnUjkged1tehqCOyQbSanFaDmlvztt3QfKFHc/b4U2mXBXPYymstRiwEWxawghIN knXt0sP0v5NeXQp94pfGcqcXcZi+d0YiMAp9wAhyVNs/Yhp6ZGs/zvANU1iGCyMmV13LU+zSvR0 4IPFhKc0d5dIetqLcK/0ZdFSmAv3rMA2Wr+T/UpAqOpMBC6quWAACLg3d4rUw9zL9FhFFarCeMl ulc0Fww9v7CMUxmRKK1G9Q6oJO21qTAFHI66PWCdexczaaLWOA9yn1sq77C8nykYGNqbAKDAkcb +TVFSW6KUXBGLt8bUGqmroH9MiEr1jdSnMMqtMMoieY5MJc/aDEGGEc= X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:4812:b0:4a2:417:7db5 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4ba0233982cmr3105225e9.2.1794254212140; Mon, 09 Nov 2026 11:56:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from scheduler.schedules ([85.100.66.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-4ba0203a6b0sm10595085e9.5.2026.11.09.11.56.49 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 09 Nov 2026 11:56:51 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2026 22:56:47 +0300 From: Kayra Cizmeci To: Vincent Guittot Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, vschneid@redhat.com, kprateek.nayak@amd.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lukasz.luba@arm.com, rafael@kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, void@manifault.com, arighi@nvidia.com, changwoo@igalia.com, sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, qyousef@layalina.io, christian.loehle@arm.com, pierre.gondois@arm.com, sshegde@linux.ibm.com, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/20 v3] sched/eevdf: Add min slice check when selecting CPU Message-ID: References: <20261106151947.3991524-1-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> <20261106151947.3991524-7-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> X-Mailing-List: sched-ext@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Nov 09, 2026 at 04:55:23PM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote: > On Sat, 7 Nov 2026 at 09:57, Kayra Cizmeci wrote: > > > > > > Hi Vincent, > > > > > > Sashiko reviewed this one so I'll just put here my own concerns instead > > of repeating. > > Regarding sashiko's feedback about cpu state ranking, I chose this > ranking on purpose. > For !SMT : > - 7 CPU is idle and fully fits (i.e. return immediately) > - 6 CPU fully fits and is not idle but we can preempt current because > of slice so the task will run on the best CPU immediately > - 5 CPU is idle but doesn't fit uclamp min. On such a CPU, the task > can easily miss its deadline > - 4 CPU is idle but doesn't fit at all. This is even worse > > For SMT > - 7:CPU is idle and fully fits (i.e. return immediately) > - 6: CPU is busy and fully fits. Although CPU is not idle, task can > preempt current because of its slice and run immediately on a CPU. > This is similar to an idle CPU (and maybe even better). While writing > this, I realize that I should probably check the lag too > - 5: CPU is idle but doesn't fit uclamp min. On such a CPU, the task > can easily miss its deadline > - 4: CPU is idle but doesn't fit at all. This is even worse than -5 > - 3: CPU is idle and fits for task but sibling is busy > - 2: CPU and sibling are busy and fits for task and like-6 task will > run immediately > - 1: CPU is idle and doesn't fit uclamp and sibling is busy > 0: CPU is idle but doesn't fit at all, and sibling is busy. > > Note that with the push mecanism we could look for another CPU for the > task that will be preempted > Thanks for the great explanation! My only concern is on 6 and 2, as I explained in my first message, below. Sashiko also pointed out other concerns, it would be good to check them all out. > > > > > > Look here: > > > > CPU1: CPU2: > > FA RA > > FC > > > > CPU2 has 1 RT and 1 Fair tasks named RA and FC. > > Let's say RA is running on CPU2 and FC's slice is 10 ms. > > > > And let's say FA has 8 ms slice, and a fair task named TC is waking up > > with 9 ms slice: > > > > * We look to CPU1, 9 < 8 is false so we return false > > > > * We look to CPU2, 9 < 10 is true so we return it. > > > > But the problem is, CPU2 has a RT task running and we are going to > > compete with the RT task. In that case it can be worse than CPU1. > > Thanks, Kayra