From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Weiner Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched/psi: iterate through cgroups directly Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2023 14:15:12 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20230208161654.99556-1-ryncsn@gmail.com> <20230208161654.99556-3-ryncsn@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cmpxchg-org.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=lruqI717GEqwSqhIRWVJHYQvXYTXBA2SnOdHTnWZ0Hc=; b=IA5Ku2U10160DCh0OY6jBF0v6JMjNFPl5SHCV2Gd8RxQK0iWl+/G70px3kmh/K5Kd0 vUlYWWHKGnQG4d2DrtJJYAur+MYTJLuj0NpnAntBKLuNo/pVBromJcAe5QL+yZSHIBvg DewxvkaQNlcdyWXTPkFsLzDWotOFqaN4TADBCtGxp9TlxoZxWTTWO2W4fsrEqpVfRrsH 6euXxZuD3zSaRvIQz/3a3I7Dux/WrkpjlMCVroaKO4F5KbvIqrHtaTsmOJ7koysbnRQL umlnq7KV3CC0w0dTKMsS8vmPENmTqy3nzNW2hFUo6+Pcz2Qo2EUbGuUE/tbvaYtmNLxA 62Jw== Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230208161654.99556-3-ryncsn-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Kairui Song Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan , Chengming Zhou , Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Koutn=FD?= , Tejun Heo , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Kairui Song On Thu, Feb 09, 2023 at 12:16:54AM +0800, Kairui Song wrote: > From: Kairui Song > > psi_group->parent has the same hierarchy as the cgroup it's in. > So just iterate through cgroup instead. > > By adjusting the iteration logic, save some space in psi_group > struct, and the performance is actually better. I see a measurable > performance gain using mmtests/perfpipe: > > (AVG of 100 test, ops/sec, the higher the better) > KVM guest on a i7-9700: > psi=0 root cgroup 5 levels of cgroup > Before: 59221 55352 47821 > After: 60100 56036 50884 > > KVM guest on a Ryzen 9 5900HX: > psi=0 root cgroup 5 levels of cgroup > Before: 144566 138919 128888 > After: 145812 139580 133514 > > Signed-off-by: Kairui Song > Signed-off-by: Kairui Song Awesome! A few comments below: > @@ -858,15 +858,34 @@ static void psi_group_change(struct psi_group *group, int cpu, > schedule_delayed_work(&group->avgs_work, PSI_FREQ); > } > > -static inline struct psi_group *task_psi_group(struct task_struct *task) > +static inline struct psi_group *psi_iter_first(struct task_struct *task, void **iter) Please name these psi_groups_first() and psi_groups_next(). > #ifdef CONFIG_CGROUPS > - if (static_branch_likely(&psi_cgroups_enabled)) > - return cgroup_psi(task_dfl_cgroup(task)); > + if (static_branch_likely(&psi_cgroups_enabled)) { > + struct cgroup *cgroup = task_dfl_cgroup(task); > + > + *iter = cgroup_parent(cgroup); > + return cgroup_psi(cgroup); > + } > #endif > return &psi_system; > } > > +static inline struct psi_group *psi_iter_next(void **iter) > +{ > +#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUPS > + if (static_branch_likely(&psi_cgroups_enabled)) { > + struct cgroup *cgroup = *iter; > + > + if (cgroup) { > + *iter = cgroup_parent(cgroup); > + return cgroup_psi(cgroup); > + } > + } > +#endif > + return NULL; > +} > @@ -886,6 +905,7 @@ void psi_task_change(struct task_struct *task, int clear, int set) > { > int cpu = task_cpu(task); > struct psi_group *group; > + void *iter; > u64 now; > > if (!task->pid) > @@ -895,16 +915,17 @@ void psi_task_change(struct task_struct *task, int clear, int set) > > now = cpu_clock(cpu); > > - group = task_psi_group(task); > + group = psi_iter_first(task, &iter); > do { > psi_group_change(group, cpu, clear, set, now, true); > - } while ((group = group->parent)); > + } while ((group = psi_iter_next(&iter))); > } > > void psi_task_switch(struct task_struct *prev, struct task_struct *next, > bool sleep) > { > struct psi_group *group, *common = NULL; > + void *iter; > int cpu = task_cpu(prev); > u64 now = cpu_clock(cpu); Please add @iter at the end to keep line length sorting. > @@ -915,7 +936,7 @@ void psi_task_switch(struct task_struct *prev, struct task_struct *next, > * ancestors with @prev, those will already have @prev's > * TSK_ONCPU bit set, and we can stop the iteration there. > */ > - group = task_psi_group(next); > + group = psi_iter_first(prev, &iter); > do { > if (per_cpu_ptr(group->pcpu, cpu)->state_mask & > PSI_ONCPU) { > @@ -924,7 +945,7 @@ void psi_task_switch(struct task_struct *prev, struct task_struct *next, > } > > psi_group_change(group, cpu, 0, TSK_ONCPU, now, true); > - } while ((group = group->parent)); > + } while ((group = psi_iter_next(&iter))); > } > > if (prev->pid) { > @@ -957,12 +978,12 @@ void psi_task_switch(struct task_struct *prev, struct task_struct *next, > > psi_flags_change(prev, clear, set); > > - group = task_psi_group(prev); > + group = psi_iter_first(prev, &iter); > do { > if (group == common) > break; > psi_group_change(group, cpu, clear, set, now, wake_clock); > - } while ((group = group->parent)); > + } while ((group = psi_iter_next(&iter))); > > /* > * TSK_ONCPU is handled up to the common ancestor. If there are > @@ -972,7 +993,7 @@ void psi_task_switch(struct task_struct *prev, struct task_struct *next, > */ > if ((prev->psi_flags ^ next->psi_flags) & ~TSK_ONCPU) { > clear &= ~TSK_ONCPU; > - for (; group; group = group->parent) > + for (; group; group = psi_iter_next(&iter)) > psi_group_change(group, cpu, clear, set, now, wake_clock); > } > } > @@ -983,6 +1004,7 @@ void psi_account_irqtime(struct task_struct *task, u32 delta) > { > int cpu = task_cpu(task); > struct psi_group *group; > + void *iter; > struct psi_group_cpu *groupc; > u64 now; Ditto. You can move @groupc in the same patch. Otherwise, this looks good to me. Please add: Acked-by: Johannes Weiner