public inbox for linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@redhat.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
	frederic@kernel.org, mtosatti@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
	abelits@marvell.com, bhelgaas@google.com,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, mingo@kernel.org,
	peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de, davem@davemloft.net,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, sfr@canb.auug.org.au,
	stephen@networkplumber.org, rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: [Patch v2 1/3] lib: Restrict cpumask_local_spread to houskeeping CPUs
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 19:45:08 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200622234510.240834-2-nitesh@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200622234510.240834-1-nitesh@redhat.com>

From: Alex Belits <abelits@marvell.com>

The current implementation of cpumask_local_spread() does not respect the
isolated CPUs, i.e., even if a CPU has been isolated for Real-Time task,
it will return it to the caller for pinning of its IRQ threads. Having
these unwanted IRQ threads on an isolated CPU adds up to a latency
overhead.

Restrict the CPUs that are returned for spreading IRQs only to the
available housekeeping CPUs.

Signed-off-by: Alex Belits <abelits@marvell.com>
Signed-off-by: Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@redhat.com>
---
 lib/cpumask.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/cpumask.c b/lib/cpumask.c
index fb22fb266f93..cc4311a8c079 100644
--- a/lib/cpumask.c
+++ b/lib/cpumask.c
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
 #include <linux/export.h>
 #include <linux/memblock.h>
 #include <linux/numa.h>
+#include <linux/sched/isolation.h>
 
 /**
  * cpumask_next - get the next cpu in a cpumask
@@ -205,28 +206,34 @@ void __init free_bootmem_cpumask_var(cpumask_var_t mask)
  */
 unsigned int cpumask_local_spread(unsigned int i, int node)
 {
-	int cpu;
+	int cpu, m, n, hk_flags;
+	const struct cpumask *mask;
 
+	hk_flags = HK_FLAG_DOMAIN | HK_FLAG_WQ;
+	mask = housekeeping_cpumask(hk_flags);
+	m = cpumask_weight(mask);
 	/* Wrap: we always want a cpu. */
-	i %= num_online_cpus();
+	n = i % m;
+	while (m-- > 0) {
+		if (node == NUMA_NO_NODE) {
+			for_each_cpu(cpu, mask)
+				if (n-- == 0)
+					return cpu;
+		} else {
+			/* NUMA first. */
+			for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpumask_of_node(node), mask)
+				if (n-- == 0)
+					return cpu;
 
-	if (node == NUMA_NO_NODE) {
-		for_each_cpu(cpu, cpu_online_mask)
-			if (i-- == 0)
-				return cpu;
-	} else {
-		/* NUMA first. */
-		for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpumask_of_node(node), cpu_online_mask)
-			if (i-- == 0)
-				return cpu;
+			for_each_cpu(cpu, mask) {
+				/* Skip NUMA nodes, done above. */
+				if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu,
+						     cpumask_of_node(node)))
+					continue;
 
-		for_each_cpu(cpu, cpu_online_mask) {
-			/* Skip NUMA nodes, done above. */
-			if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, cpumask_of_node(node)))
-				continue;
-
-			if (i-- == 0)
-				return cpu;
+				if (n-- == 0)
+					return cpu;
+			}
 		}
 	}
 	BUG();
-- 
2.18.4


  reply	other threads:[~2020-06-22 23:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-06-22 23:45 [PATCH v2 0/3] Preventing job distribution to isolated CPUs Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-22 23:45 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal [this message]
2020-06-23  9:21   ` [Patch v2 1/3] lib: Restrict cpumask_local_spread to houskeeping CPUs Peter Zijlstra
2020-06-23 13:18     ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-22 23:45 ` [Patch v2 2/3] PCI: Restrict probe functions to housekeeping CPUs Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-22 23:45 ` [Patch v2 3/3] net: Restrict receive packets queuing " Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-23  9:23   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-06-23 11:42     ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-23  1:03 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Preventing job distribution to isolated CPUs Nitesh Narayan Lal

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=20200622234510.240834-2-nitesh@redhat.com \
    --to=nitesh@redhat.com \
    --cc=abelits@marvell.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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