public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Li, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] sched/fair: Merge select_idle_core/cpu()
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 20:55:03 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <05522d03-e86d-420e-4e88-f098d9a22908@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210115100855.23679-6-mgorman@techsingularity.net>

On 2021/1/15 18:08, Mel Gorman wrote:
> From: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> 
> Both select_idle_core() and select_idle_cpu() do a loop over the same
> cpumask. Observe that by clearing the already visited CPUs, we can
> fold the iteration and iterate a core at a time.
> 
> All we need to do is remember any non-idle CPU we encountered while
> scanning for an idle core. This way we'll only iterate every CPU once.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/fair.c | 97 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>  1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 12e08da90024..6c0f841e9e75 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -6006,6 +6006,14 @@ static inline int find_idlest_cpu(struct sched_domain *sd, struct task_struct *p
>  	return new_cpu;
>  }
>  
> +static inline int __select_idle_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int core, struct cpumask *cpus)

Sorry if I missed anything, why p and cpus are needed here?

> +{
> +	if (available_idle_cpu(core) || sched_idle_cpu(core))
> +		return core;
> +
> +	return -1;
> +}
> +
>  #ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_SMT
>  DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(sched_smt_present);
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sched_smt_present);
> @@ -6066,40 +6074,34 @@ void __update_idle_core(struct rq *rq)
>   * there are no idle cores left in the system; tracked through
>   * sd_llc->shared->has_idle_cores and enabled through update_idle_core() above.
>   */
> -static int select_idle_core(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int target)
> +static int select_idle_core(struct task_struct *p, int core, struct cpumask *cpus, int *idle_cpu)
>  {
> -	struct cpumask *cpus = this_cpu_cpumask_var_ptr(select_idle_mask);
> -	int core, cpu;
> +	bool idle = true;
> +	int cpu;
>  
>  	if (!static_branch_likely(&sched_smt_present))
> -		return -1;
> -
> -	if (!test_idle_cores(target, false))
> -		return -1;
> -
> -	cpumask_and(cpus, sched_domain_span(sd), p->cpus_ptr);
> +		return __select_idle_cpu(p, core, cpus);
>  
> -	for_each_cpu_wrap(core, cpus, target) {
> -		bool idle = true;
> -
> -		for_each_cpu(cpu, cpu_smt_mask(core)) {
> -			if (!available_idle_cpu(cpu)) {
> -				idle = false;
> -				break;
> +	for_each_cpu(cpu, cpu_smt_mask(core)) {
> +		if (!available_idle_cpu(cpu)) {
> +			idle = false;
> +			if (*idle_cpu == -1) {
> +				if (sched_idle_cpu(cpu) && cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, p->cpus_ptr)) {
> +					*idle_cpu = cpu;
> +					break;
> +				}
> +				continue;
>  			}
> +			break;
>  		}
> -
> -		if (idle)
> -			return core;
> -
> -		cpumask_andnot(cpus, cpus, cpu_smt_mask(core));
> +		if (*idle_cpu == -1 && cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, p->cpus_ptr))
> +			*idle_cpu = cpu;
>  	}
>  
> -	/*
> -	 * Failed to find an idle core; stop looking for one.
> -	 */
> -	set_idle_cores(target, 0);
> +	if (idle)
> +		return core;
>  
> +	cpumask_andnot(cpus, cpus, cpu_smt_mask(core));
>  	return -1;
>  }
>  
> @@ -6107,9 +6109,18 @@ static int select_idle_core(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int
>  
>  #define sched_smt_weight	1
>  
> -static inline int select_idle_core(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int target)
> +static inline void set_idle_cores(int cpu, int val)
>  {
> -	return -1;
> +}
> +
> +static inline bool test_idle_cores(int cpu, bool def)
> +{
> +	return def;
> +}
> +
> +static inline int select_idle_core(struct task_struct *p, int core, struct cpumask *cpus, int *idle_cpu)
> +{
> +	return __select_idle_cpu(p, core, cpus);
>  }
>  
>  #endif /* CONFIG_SCHED_SMT */
> @@ -6124,10 +6135,11 @@ static inline int select_idle_core(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *s
>  static int select_idle_cpu(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int target)
>  {
>  	struct cpumask *cpus = this_cpu_cpumask_var_ptr(select_idle_mask);
> +	int i, cpu, idle_cpu = -1, nr = INT_MAX;
> +	bool smt = test_idle_cores(target, false);
> +	int this = smp_processor_id();
>  	struct sched_domain *this_sd;
>  	u64 time;
> -	int this = smp_processor_id();
> -	int cpu, nr = INT_MAX;
>  
>  	this_sd = rcu_dereference(*this_cpu_ptr(&sd_llc));
>  	if (!this_sd)
> @@ -6135,7 +6147,7 @@ static int select_idle_cpu(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int t
>  
>  	cpumask_and(cpus, sched_domain_span(sd), p->cpus_ptr);
>  
> -	if (sched_feat(SIS_PROP)) {
> +	if (sched_feat(SIS_PROP) && !smt) {
Is it possible the system does have a idle core, but I still don't want to scan the entire llc domain?

>  		u64 avg_cost, avg_idle, span_avg;
>  
>  		/*
> @@ -6159,16 +6171,29 @@ static int select_idle_cpu(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int t
>  	for_each_cpu_wrap(cpu, cpus, target) {
>  		if (!--nr)
>  			return -1;

It looks like nr only makes sense when smt = false now, can it be moved into else branch below?

> -		if (available_idle_cpu(cpu) || sched_idle_cpu(cpu))
> -			break;
> +		if (smt) {
> +			i = select_idle_core(p, cpu, cpus, &idle_cpu);
> +			if ((unsigned int)i < nr_cpumask_bits)
> +				return i;

What if the last idle core is selected here, should we set_idle_cores false before return?

> +
> +		} else {
> +			i = __select_idle_cpu(p, cpu, cpus);
> +			if ((unsigned int)i < nr_cpumask_bits) {
> +				idle_cpu = i;
> +				break;
> +			}
> +		}
>  	}
>  
> -	if (sched_feat(SIS_PROP)) {
> +	if (smt)
> +		set_idle_cores(this, false);
> +
> +	if (sched_feat(SIS_PROP) && !smt) {
>  		time = cpu_clock(this) - time;
>  		update_avg(&this_sd->avg_scan_cost, time);
>  	}
>  
> -	return cpu;
> +	return idle_cpu;
>  }
>  
>  /*
> @@ -6297,10 +6322,6 @@ static int select_idle_sibling(struct task_struct *p, int prev, int target)
>  	if (!sd)
>  		return target;
>  
> -	i = select_idle_core(p, sd, target);
> -	if ((unsigned)i < nr_cpumask_bits)
> -		return i;
> -
>  	i = select_idle_cpu(p, sd, target);
>  	if ((unsigned)i < nr_cpumask_bits)
>  		return i;
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2021-01-18 12:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-15 10:08 [PATCH v2 0/5] Scan for an idle sibling in a single pass Mel Gorman
2021-01-15 10:08 ` [PATCH 1/5] sched/fair: Remove SIS_AVG_CPU Mel Gorman
2021-01-15 10:08 ` [PATCH 2/5] sched/fair: Move avg_scan_cost calculations under SIS_PROP Mel Gorman
2021-01-15 10:08 ` [PATCH 3/5] sched/fair: Make select_idle_cpu() proportional to cores Mel Gorman
2021-01-18  8:14   ` Li, Aubrey
2021-01-18  9:27     ` Mel Gorman
2021-01-15 10:08 ` [PATCH 4/5] sched/fair: Remove select_idle_smt() Mel Gorman
2021-01-15 10:08 ` [PATCH 5/5] sched/fair: Merge select_idle_core/cpu() Mel Gorman
2021-01-18 12:55   ` Li, Aubrey [this message]
2021-01-18 14:41     ` Mel Gorman
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-01-19 11:22 [PATCH v3 0/5] Scan for an idle sibling in a single pass Mel Gorman
2021-01-19 11:22 ` [PATCH 5/5] sched/fair: Merge select_idle_core/cpu() Mel Gorman
2021-01-20  8:30   ` Gautham R Shenoy
2021-01-20  9:12     ` Mel Gorman
2021-01-20  9:21       ` Vincent Guittot
2021-01-20  9:54         ` Mel Gorman
2021-01-20  9:58           ` Vincent Guittot
2021-01-20 13:55           ` Gautham R Shenoy
2021-01-11 15:50 [PATCH 0/5] Scan for an idle sibling in a single pass Mel Gorman
2021-01-11 15:50 ` [PATCH 5/5] sched/fair: Merge select_idle_core/cpu() Mel Gorman
2021-01-13 17:03   ` Vincent Guittot
2021-01-14  9:35     ` Mel Gorman
2021-01-14 13:25       ` Vincent Guittot
2021-01-14 13:53         ` Mel Gorman
2021-01-14 15:44           ` Vincent Guittot
2021-01-14 17:18             ` Mel Gorman

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=05522d03-e86d-420e-4e88-f098d9a22908@linux.intel.com \
    --to=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=qais.yousef@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox