The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Erich Focht <efocht@ess.nec.de>
To: Andrew Theurer <habanero@us.ibm.com>,
	"Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>,
	Michael Hohnbaum <hohnbaum@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pooling NUMA scheduler with initial load balancing
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 01:02:13 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200210100102.13980.efocht@ess.nec.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200210091258.08379.habanero@us.ibm.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1031 bytes --]

> > Starting migration thread for cpu 3
> > Bringing up 4
> > CPU>dividNOWrro!
>
> I got the same thing on 2.5.40-mm1.  It looks like it may be a a divide by
> zero in calc_pool_load.  I am attempting to boot a band-aid version right
> now.  OK, got a little further:
This opened my eyes, thanks for all your help and patience!!!

The problem is that the load balancer is called before the CPU pools
were set up. That's fine, I thought, because I define in sched_init
the default pool 0 to include all CPUs. But: in find_busiest_queue()
the cpu_to_node(this_cpu) delivers a non-zero pool which is not set up
yet, therefore pool_nr_cpus[pool]=0 and we get a zero divide.

I'm still wondering why this doesn't happen on our architecture. Maybe
the interrupts are disabled longer, I'll check. Anyway, a fix is to
force this_pool to be 0 as long as numpools=1. The attached patch is a
quick untested hack, maybe one can do it better. Has to be applied on top
of the other 2.

Going to sleep now...

Bye,
Erich

[-- Attachment #2: 01a-numa_sched_fix-2.5.39.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 1299 bytes --]

diff -urNp 2.5.39-disc-ns/kernel/sched.c 2.5.39-disc-ns8/kernel/sched.c
--- 2.5.39-disc-ns/kernel/sched.c	Wed Oct  9 17:06:04 2002
+++ 2.5.39-disc-ns8/kernel/sched.c	Thu Oct 10 00:51:20 2002
@@ -774,7 +774,7 @@ static inline runqueue_t *find_busiest_q
 	runqueue_t *busiest = NULL;
 	int imax, best_cpu, pool, max_pool_load, max_pool_idx;
 	int i, del_shift;
-	int avg_load=-1, this_pool = cpu_to_node(this_cpu);
+	int avg_load=-1, this_pool;
 
 	/* Need at least ~25% imbalance to trigger balancing. */
 #define BALANCED(m,t) (((m) <= 1) || (((m) - (t))/2 < (((m) + (t))/2 + 3)/4))
@@ -784,10 +784,13 @@ static inline runqueue_t *find_busiest_q
 	else
 		*nr_running = this_rq->prev_nr_running[this_cpu];
 
+	this_pool = (numpools == 1 ? 0 : cpu_to_node(this_cpu));
 	best_cpu = calc_pool_load(this_rq->load, this_cpu, this_pool, idle);
 	
 	if (best_cpu != this_cpu)
 		goto check_out;
+	else if (numpools == 1)
+		goto out;
 
  scan_all:
 	best_cpu = -1;
@@ -830,7 +833,7 @@ static inline runqueue_t *find_busiest_q
 	if (!BALANCED(this_rq->load[0][best_cpu],*nr_running)) {
 		busiest = cpu_rq(best_cpu);
 		this_rq->wait_node = -1;
-	} else if (avg_load == -1)
+	} else if (avg_load == -1 && numpools > 1)
 		/* only scanned local pool, so let's look at all of them */
 		goto scan_all;
  out:

  parent reply	other threads:[~2002-10-09 22:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-10-06 16:51 [RFC] NUMA schedulers benchmark results Erich Focht
2002-10-06 20:24 ` Erich Focht
2002-10-07  0:00   ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-10-07  0:58 ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-10-07 16:52   ` Erich Focht
2002-10-07  7:25 ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-10-07  7:40   ` Ingo Molnar
2002-10-07 20:09   ` [PATCH] pooling NUMA scheduler with initial load balancing Erich Focht
     [not found]     ` <1420721189.1034032091@[10.10.2.3]>
2002-10-08 17:33       ` Erich Focht
2002-10-08 19:44         ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-10-09 16:26           ` Erich Focht
2002-10-09 17:33             ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-10-09 17:58               ` Andrew Theurer
2002-10-09 18:13                 ` Andrew Theurer
2002-10-09 23:02                 ` Erich Focht [this message]
2002-10-10 17:34                   ` Andrew Theurer
     [not found]                     ` <200210110947.11714.efocht@ess.nec.de>
2002-10-11  8:27                       ` Erich Focht
2002-10-11 14:47                         ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-10-11 15:29                           ` Erich Focht
2002-10-11 15:34                             ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-10-09  1:15         ` Christoph Hellwig
2002-10-09 10:29           ` Erich Focht
2002-10-07 16:37 ` [RFC] NUMA schedulers benchmark results Michael Hohnbaum
2002-10-07 20:35   ` Erich Focht

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=200210100102.13980.efocht@ess.nec.de \
    --to=efocht@ess.nec.de \
    --cc=habanero@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=hohnbaum@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mbligh@aracnet.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    /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