From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
jhladky@redhat.com, ktkhai@parallels.com,
tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com,
Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched: make update_sd_pick_busiest return true on a busier sd
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 16:30:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140728143005.GU6758@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140725153210.47c09bfe@annuminas.surriel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2975 bytes --]
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 03:32:10PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> Subject: sched: make update_sd_pick_busiest return true on a busier sd
>
> Currently update_sd_pick_busiest only identifies the busiest sd
> that is either overloaded, or has a group imbalance. When no
> sd is imbalanced or overloaded, the load balancer fails to find
> the busiest domain.
>
> This breaks load balancing between domains that are not overloaded,
> in the !SD_ASYM_PACKING case. This patch makes update_sd_pick_busiest
> return true when the busiest sd yet is encountered.
>
> Behaviour for SD_ASYM_PACKING does not seem to match the comment,
> but I have no hardware to test that so I have left the behaviour
> of that code unchanged.
>
> It is unclear what to do with the group_imb condition.
> Should group_imb override a busier load? If so, should we fix
> calculate_imbalance to return a sensible number when the "busiest"
> node found has a below average load? We probably need to fix
> calculate_imbalance anyway, to deal with an overloaded group that
> happens to have a below average load...
I think we want overloaded > group_imb > other. So prefer overloaded
groups, imbalanced groups if no overloaded and anything else if no
overloaded and imbalanced thingies.
If you look at the comment near sg_imbalanced(), in that case we want to
move tasks from the first group to the second, even though the second
group would be the heaviest.
enum group_type {
group_other = 0,
group_imbalanced,
group_overloaded,
};
static enum group_type group_classify(struct sg_lb_stats *sgs)
{
if (sgs->sum_nr_running > sgs->group_capacity_factor)
return group_overloaded;
if (sgs->group_imb)
return group_imbalanced;
return group_other;
}
> /**
> * update_sd_pick_busiest - return 1 on busiest group
> * @env: The load balancing environment.
> @@ -5957,7 +5962,7 @@ static inline void update_sg_lb_stats(struct lb_env *env,
> * @sgs: sched_group statistics
> *
> * Determine if @sg is a busier group than the previously selected
> - * busiest group.
> + * busiest group.
We really need that extra trailing whitespace, yes? ;-)
> * Return: %true if @sg is a busier group than the previously selected
> * busiest group. %false otherwise.
> @@ -5967,13 +5972,17 @@ static bool update_sd_pick_busiest(struct lb_env *env,
> struct sched_group *sg,
> struct sg_lb_stats *sgs)
> {
if (group_classify(sgs) < group_classify(&sds->busiest_stats))
return false;
> if (sgs->avg_load <= sds->busiest_stat.avg_load)
> return false;
>
> + /* This is the busiest node. */
> + if (!(env->sd->flags & SD_ASYM_PACKING))
> return true;
>
> /*
We could replace sg_lb_stats::group_imb with the above and avoid the
endless recomputation I suppose.
Also, we still need a little change to calculate_imbalance() where we
assume sum_nr_running > group_capacity_factor.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-28 14:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-22 18:45 [PATCH] sched: make update_sd_pick_busiest return true on a busier sd Rik van Riel
2014-07-23 7:41 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-07-25 13:33 ` Rik van Riel
2014-07-25 14:29 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-07-25 14:46 ` Rik van Riel
2014-07-25 14:02 ` Rik van Riel
2014-07-25 14:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-25 15:02 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-07-25 15:13 ` Rik van Riel
2014-07-25 15:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-25 15:45 ` Rik van Riel
2014-07-25 16:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-25 16:22 ` Rik van Riel
2014-07-25 17:57 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-07-25 19:32 ` [PATCH v2] " Rik van Riel
2014-07-28 8:23 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-07-28 15:04 ` Rik van Riel
2014-07-28 14:30 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2014-07-27 23:57 ` [PATCH] " Michael Neuling
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=20140728143005.GU6758@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=jhladky@redhat.com \
--cc=ktkhai@parallels.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mikey@neuling.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.pitre@linaro.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/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