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:
next prev 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