public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Suresh B Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>,
	Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Vatsa <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	David Collier-Brown <davecb@sun.com>,
	Tim Connors <tconnors@astro.swin.edu.au>,
	Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 5/5] sched: activate active load balancing in new idle cpus
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:21:50 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1226424110.7685.2038.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081111170441.GT4646@dirshya.in.ibm.com>

On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 22:34 +0530, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> [2008-11-11 14:47:15]:
> 
> > On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 00:03 +0530, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote:
> > > Active load balancing is a process by which migration thread
> > > is woken up on the target CPU in order to pull current
> > > running task on another package into this newly idle
> > > package.
> > > 
> > > This method is already in use with normal load_balance(),
> > > this patch introduces this method to new idle cpus when
> > > sched_mc is set to POWERSAVINGS_BALANCE_WAKEUP.
> > > 
> > > This logic provides effective consolidation of short running
> > > daemon jobs in a almost idle system
> > > 
> > > The side effect of this patch may be ping-ponging of tasks
> > > if the system is moderately utilised. May need to adjust the
> > > iterations before triggering.
> > 
> > OK, I'm so not getting this patch..
> > 
> > if normal newly idle balancing fails that means the other runqueue has
> > only a single task on it (or some other really stubborn stuff), so then
> > you go move that one task that is already running, from one cpu to
> > another.
> > 
> > _why_?
> > 
> > The only answer I can come up with is that you prefer one cpu's
> > idle-ness over another - which makes sense, as you try to get whole
> > packages idle.
> 
> Your answer is correct.  We want to move that one task from a non-idle
> cpu to this cpu that is just going to be idle.  
> 
> This is the same method used to move task in load_balance(), I have
> extended it for load_balance_newidle() to make the consolidation
> faster at sched_mc=2.
> 
> 
> > But I'm not seeing where that package logic is hidden..
> 
> 
> The package logic comes from find_busiest_group().  If there are no
> imbalance, then find_busiest_group() will return NULL.  However when
> sched_mc={1,2} then find_busiest_group() will select a group
> from which a running task may be pulled to this cpu in order to make
> the other package idle.  If there is no opportunity to make a package
> idle and if there are no imbalance, then find_busiest_group() will
> return NULL and no action will be taken in load_balance_newidle().
> 
> Under normal task pull operation due to imbalance, there will be more
> than one task in the source run queue and move_tasks() will succeed.
> ld_moved will be true and the active balance code will not be
> triggered.
> 
> If we enter a scenario where we are moving the only running task from
> another cpu, then this should have been suggested by
> find_busiest_group's sched_mc balance logic and thus moving that task
> will potentially freeup the source package.
> 
> Thanks for the careful review.

Ah, right, thanks!

Could you clarify this by adding a comment to this effect right before
the added code?


  reply	other threads:[~2008-11-11 17:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-11-10 18:32 [RFC PATCH v3 0/5] Tunable sched_mc_power_savings=n Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-11-10 18:33 ` [RFC PATCH v3 1/5] sched: Framework for sched_mc/smt_power_savings=N Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-11-10 18:33 ` [RFC PATCH v3 2/5] sched: favour lower logical cpu number for sched_mc balance Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-11-10 18:33 ` [RFC PATCH v3 3/5] sched: nominate preferred wakeup cpu Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-11-11 13:43   ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-11-11 14:07     ` Gregory Haskins
2008-11-11 15:21       ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2008-11-11 15:26         ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-11-11 17:15           ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-11-11 17:17       ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-11-11 16:48     ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-11-11 16:49       ` Balbir Singh
2008-11-11 17:27         ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-11-10 18:33 ` [RFC PATCH v3 4/5] sched: bias task wakeups to preferred semi-idle packages Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-11-10 18:33 ` [RFC PATCH v3 5/5] sched: activate active load balancing in new idle cpus Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-11-11 13:47   ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-11-11 17:04     ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-11-11 17:21       ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2008-11-11 17:31         ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-11-10 18:50 ` [RFC PATCH v3 0/5] Tunable sched_mc_power_savings=n Peter Zijlstra
2008-11-11  4:52   ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan

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=1226424110.7685.2038.camel@twins \
    --to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=davecb@sun.com \
    --cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maxk@qualcomm.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
    --cc=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=tconnors@astro.swin.edu.au \
    --cc=vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.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