From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Cc: nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [patch] sched: fix broken smt/mc optimizations with CFS
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 13:54:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070823115416.GA31027@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070816010150.GG10033@linux-os.sc.intel.com>
* Siddha, Suresh B <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com> wrote:
> * a think about bumping its value to force at least one task to be
> * moved
> */
> - if (*imbalance + SCHED_LOAD_SCALE_FUZZ < busiest_load_per_task/2) {
> + if (*imbalance < busiest_load_per_task) {
> unsigned long tmp, pwr_now, pwr_move;
hm, found a problem: this removes the 'fuzz' from balancing, which is a
slight over-balancing to perturb CPU-bound tasks to be distributed in a
fairer manner between CPUs. So how about the patch below instead?
a good testcase for this is to start 3 CPU-bound tasks on a 2-core box:
for ((i=0; i<3; i++)); do while :; do :; done & done
with your patch applied two of the loops stick to one core, getting 50%
each - the third loop sticks to the other core, getting 100% CPU time:
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
3093 root 20 0 2736 528 252 R 100 0.0 0:23.81 bash
3094 root 20 0 2736 532 256 R 50 0.0 0:11.95 bash
3095 root 20 0 2736 532 256 R 50 0.0 0:11.95 bash
with no patch, or with my patch below each gets ~66% of CPU time,
long-term:
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
2290 mingo 20 0 2736 528 252 R 67 0.0 3:22.95 bash
2291 mingo 20 0 2736 532 256 R 67 0.0 3:18.94 bash
2292 mingo 20 0 2736 532 256 R 66 0.0 3:19.83 bash
the breakage wasnt caused by the fuzz, it was caused by the /2 - the
patch below should fix this for real.
Ingo
------------------------------>
Subject: sched: fix broken SMT/MC optimizations
From: "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
On a four package system with HT - HT load balancing optimizations were
broken. For example, if two tasks end up running on two logical threads
of one of the packages, scheduler is not able to pull one of the tasks
to a completely idle package.
In this scenario, for nice-0 tasks, imbalance calculated by scheduler
will be 512 and find_busiest_queue() will return 0 (as each cpu's load
is 1024 > imbalance and has only one task running).
Similarly MC scheduler optimizations also get fixed with this patch.
[ mingo@elte.hu: restored fair balancing by increasing the fuzz and
adding it back to the power decision, without the /2
factor. ]
Signed-off-by: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
---
include/linux/sched.h | 2 +-
kernel/sched.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Index: linux/include/linux/sched.h
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/include/linux/sched.h
+++ linux/include/linux/sched.h
@@ -681,7 +681,7 @@ enum cpu_idle_type {
#define SCHED_LOAD_SHIFT 10
#define SCHED_LOAD_SCALE (1L << SCHED_LOAD_SHIFT)
-#define SCHED_LOAD_SCALE_FUZZ (SCHED_LOAD_SCALE >> 1)
+#define SCHED_LOAD_SCALE_FUZZ SCHED_LOAD_SCALE
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
#define SD_LOAD_BALANCE 1 /* Do load balancing on this domain. */
Index: linux/kernel/sched.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/kernel/sched.c
+++ linux/kernel/sched.c
@@ -2517,7 +2517,7 @@ group_next:
* a think about bumping its value to force at least one task to be
* moved
*/
- if (*imbalance + SCHED_LOAD_SCALE_FUZZ < busiest_load_per_task/2) {
+ if (*imbalance < busiest_load_per_task) {
unsigned long tmp, pwr_now, pwr_move;
unsigned int imbn;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-23 11:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-16 1:01 [patch] sched: fix broken smt/mc optimizations with CFS Siddha, Suresh B
2007-08-23 10:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-23 11:54 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2007-08-23 12:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-23 17:42 ` Daniel Walker
2007-08-27 19:19 ` Siddha, Suresh B
2007-08-27 19:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-27 19:31 ` Siddha, Suresh B
2007-08-28 22:27 ` Siddha, Suresh B
2007-08-29 3:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-09-04 23:35 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-09-04 23:46 ` Siddha, Suresh B
2007-09-05 10:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-27 16:32 ` Torsten Kaiser
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=20070823115416.GA31027@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@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