From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm/sched: memdelay: memory health interface for systems and workloads
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2017 11:28:13 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170730152813.GA26672@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170729091055.GA6524@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 11:10:55AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 11:30:10AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > +static void domain_cpu_update(struct memdelay_domain *md, int cpu,
> > + int old, int new)
> > +{
> > + enum memdelay_domain_state state;
> > + struct memdelay_domain_cpu *mdc;
> > + unsigned long now, delta;
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > +
> > + mdc = per_cpu_ptr(md->mdcs, cpu);
> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&mdc->lock, flags);
>
> Afaict this is inside scheduler locks, this cannot be a spinlock. Also,
> do we really want to add more atomics there?
I think we should be able to get away without an additional lock and
rely on the rq lock instead. schedule, enqueue, dequeue already hold
it, memdelay_enter/leave could be added. I need to think about what to
do with try_to_wake_up in order to get the cpu move accounting inside
the locked section of ttwu_queue(), but that should be doable too.
> > + if (old) {
> > + WARN_ONCE(!mdc->tasks[old], "cpu=%d old=%d new=%d counter=%d\n",
> > + cpu, old, new, mdc->tasks[old]);
> > + mdc->tasks[old] -= 1;
> > + }
> > + if (new)
> > + mdc->tasks[new] += 1;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * The domain is somewhat delayed when a number of tasks are
> > + * delayed but there are still others running the workload.
> > + *
> > + * The domain is fully delayed when all non-idle tasks on the
> > + * CPU are delayed, or when a delayed task is actively running
> > + * and preventing productive tasks from making headway.
> > + *
> > + * The state times then add up over all CPUs in the domain: if
> > + * the domain is fully blocked on one CPU and there is another
> > + * one running the workload, the domain is considered fully
> > + * blocked 50% of the time.
> > + */
> > + if (!mdc->tasks[MTS_DELAYED_ACTIVE] && !mdc->tasks[MTS_DELAYED])
> > + state = MDS_NONE;
> > + else if (mdc->tasks[MTS_WORKING])
> > + state = MDS_SOME;
> > + else
> > + state = MDS_FULL;
> > +
> > + if (mdc->state == state)
> > + goto unlock;
> > +
> > + now = ktime_to_ns(ktime_get());
>
> ktime_get_ns(), also no ktime in scheduler code.
Okay.
I actually don't need a time source that's comparable across CPUs
since accounting periods are always fully contained within one
CPU. From the comment docs, it sounds like cpu_clock() is what I want
to use there?
> > + /* Account domain state changes */
> > + rcu_read_lock();
> > + memcg = mem_cgroup_from_task(task);
> > + do {
> > + struct memdelay_domain *md;
> > +
> > + md = memcg_domain(memcg);
> > + md->aggregate += delay;
> > + domain_cpu_update(md, cpu, old, new);
> > + } while (memcg && (memcg = parent_mem_cgroup(memcg)));
> > + rcu_read_unlock();
>
> We are _NOT_ going to do a 3rd cgroup iteration for every task action.
I'll look into that.
Thanks
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-30 15:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-27 15:30 [PATCH 0/3] memdelay: memory health metric for systems and workloads Johannes Weiner
2017-07-27 15:30 ` [PATCH 1/3] sched/loadavg: consolidate LOAD_INT, LOAD_FRAC macros Johannes Weiner
2017-07-27 15:30 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm: workingset: tell cache transitions from workingset thrashing Johannes Weiner
2017-07-27 15:30 ` [PATCH 3/3] mm/sched: memdelay: memory health interface for systems and workloads Johannes Weiner
2017-07-27 15:56 ` Johannes Weiner
2017-07-29 9:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-30 15:28 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2017-07-31 8:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-31 18:41 ` Johannes Weiner
2017-07-31 19:49 ` Mike Galbraith
2017-07-31 20:38 ` Johannes Weiner
2017-08-01 2:23 ` Mike Galbraith
2017-08-01 7:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-01 12:26 ` Johannes Weiner
2017-08-13 14:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-29 13:31 ` kbuild test robot
2017-07-27 20:43 ` [PATCH 0/3] memdelay: memory health metric " Andrew Morton
2017-07-28 19:43 ` Johannes Weiner
2017-08-02 8:11 ` Michal Hocko
2017-07-29 2:48 ` Mike Galbraith
2017-07-29 3:21 ` Mike Galbraith
2017-07-29 6:38 ` Mike Galbraith
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=20170730152813.GA26672@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).