public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Venki Pallipadi <venki@google.com>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.jf.intel.com>,
	"Shi, Alex" <alex.shi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 3/6] sched, nohz: sched group, domain aware nohz idle load balancing
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 17:03:34 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1322701415.21329.77.camel@sbsiddha-desk.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1322559859.2921.190.camel@twins>

On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 01:44 -0800, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 15:51 -0800, Suresh Siddha wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-11-24 at 03:47 -0800, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2011-11-18 at 15:03 -0800, Suresh Siddha wrote:
> > > > +       for_each_domain(cpu, sd) {
> > > > +               struct sched_group *sg = sd->groups;
> > > > +               struct sched_group_power *sgp = sg->sgp;
> > > > +               int nr_busy = atomic_read(&sgp->nr_busy_cpus);
> > > > +
> > > > +               if (nr_busy > 1 && (nr_busy * SCHED_LOAD_SCALE > sgp->power))
> > > > +                       goto need_kick;
> > > 
> > > This looks wrong, its basically always true for a box with HT.
> > 
> > In the presence of two busy HT siblings, we need to do the idle load
> > balance to figure out if the load from the busy core can be migrated to
> > any other idle core/sibling in the platform. And at this point, we
> > already know there are idle cpu's in the platform.
> 
> might have to, this nr_busy doesn't mean its actually busy, just that
> its not nohz, it might very well be idle.

correct. But we can change that.

We can track nr_busy_cpus separately and can be updated when ever the rq
goes into idle and during the first busy tick after idle. Whereas the
nohz.idle_cpus_mask can be updated only during tickless entry.

> > I will modify the above check to:
> > 
> > if (sd->flags & SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES && nr_busy > 1)
> > 	goto need_kick;
> > 
> > This way, if there is a SMT/MC domain with more than one busy cpu in the
> > group, then we will request for the idle load balancing.
> 
> Potentially 1 more than 1 busy, right? And we do the balancing just in
> case there are indeed busy cpus.
> 
> I think its useful to mention that somewhere near, that this nr_busy
> measure we use is an upper bound on actual busy.

The above should cover this.

I will send the updated version shortly.

thanks,
suresh


  reply	other threads:[~2011-12-01  0:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-11-18 23:03 [patch 0/6] sched, nohz: load balancing patches Suresh Siddha
2011-11-18 23:03 ` [patch 1/6] sched, nohz: introduce nohz_flags in the struct rq Suresh Siddha
2011-11-24 10:24   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-28 23:59     ` Suresh Siddha
2011-11-29  9:47       ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-18 23:03 ` [patch 2/6] sched, nohz: track nr_busy_cpus in the sched_group_power Suresh Siddha
2011-11-18 23:03 ` [patch 3/6] sched, nohz: sched group, domain aware nohz idle load balancing Suresh Siddha
2011-11-24 11:47   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-28 23:51     ` Suresh Siddha
2011-11-29  9:44       ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-12-01  1:03         ` Suresh Siddha [this message]
2011-12-01  1:17         ` Suresh Siddha
2011-12-01  8:36           ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-24 11:53   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-28 23:58     ` Suresh Siddha
2011-11-29  9:45       ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-18 23:03 ` [patch 4/6] sched, nohz: cleanup the find_new_ilb() using sched groups nr_busy_cpus Suresh Siddha
2011-11-18 23:03 ` [patch 5/6] sched: disable sched feature TTWU_QUEUE by default Suresh Siddha
2011-11-19  4:30   ` Mike Galbraith
2011-11-19  4:41     ` Mike Galbraith
2011-11-18 23:03 ` [patch 6/6] sched: fix the sched group node allocation for SD_OVERLAP domain Suresh Siddha
2011-12-06  9:51   ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Fix the sched group node allocation for SD_OVERLAP domains tip-bot for Suresh Siddha

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=1322701415.21329.77.camel@sbsiddha-desk.sc.intel.com \
    --to=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
    --cc=alex.shi@intel.com \
    --cc=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.jf.intel.com \
    --cc=vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=venki@google.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