From: "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
To: mingo@elte.hu
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
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: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 15:27:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070828222718.GI1894@linux-os.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070827193103.GF1894@linux-os.sc.intel.com>
On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 12:31:03PM -0700, Siddha, Suresh B wrote:
> Essentially I observed that nice 0 tasks still endup on two cores of same
> package, with out getting spread out to two different packages. This behavior
> is same with out this fix and this fix doesn't help in any way.
Ingo, Appended patch seems to fix the issue and as far as I can test, seems ok
to me.
This is a quick fix for .23. Peter Williams and myself plan to look at
code cleanups in this area (HT/MC optimizations) post .23
BTW, with this fix, do you want to retain the current FUZZ value?
thanks,
suresh
--
Try to fix MC/HT scheduler optimization breakage again, with out breaking
the FUZZ logic.
First fix the check
if (*imbalance + SCHED_LOAD_SCALE_FUZZ < busiest_load_per_task)
with this
if (*imbalance < busiest_load_per_task)
As the current check is always false for nice 0 tasks (as SCHED_LOAD_SCALE_FUZZ
is same as busiest_load_per_task for nice 0 tasks).
With the above change, imbalance was getting reset to 0 in the corner case
condition, making the FUZZ logic fail. Fix it by not corrupting the
imbalance and change the imbalance, only when it finds that the
HT/MC optimization is needed.
Signed-off-by: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
---
diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
index 9fe473a..03e5e8d 100644
--- a/kernel/sched.c
+++ b/kernel/sched.c
@@ -2511,7 +2511,7 @@ 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) {
+ if (*imbalance < busiest_load_per_task) {
unsigned long tmp, pwr_now, pwr_move;
unsigned int imbn;
@@ -2563,10 +2563,8 @@ small_imbalance:
pwr_move /= SCHED_LOAD_SCALE;
/* Move if we gain throughput */
- if (pwr_move <= pwr_now)
- goto out_balanced;
-
- *imbalance = busiest_load_per_task;
+ if (pwr_move > pwr_now)
+ *imbalance = busiest_load_per_task;
}
return busiest;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-28 22:27 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
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 [this message]
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=20070828222718.GI1894@linux-os.sc.intel.com \
--to=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
/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