public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	yuyang.du@intel.com, Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com,
	linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
	pjt@google.com, bsegall@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: update scale invariance of pelt
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:24:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151125092401.GY17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1448372970-8764-1-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org>

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 02:49:30PM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> Instead of scaling the complete value of PELT algo, we should only scale
> the running time by the current capacity of the CPU. It seems more correct
> to only scale the running time because the non running time of a task
> (sleeping or waiting for a runqueue) is the same whatever the current freq
> and the compute capacity of the CPU.

So I'm leaning towards liking this; however with your previous example
of 3 cpus and 7 tasks, where CPU0-1 are 'little' and of half the
capacity as the 'big' CPU2, with 2 tasks on CPU0-1 each and 3 tasks on
CPU2.

This would result, for CPU0, in a load of 100% wait time + 100% runtime,
scaling the runtime 50% will get you a total load of 150%.

For CPU2 we get 100% runtime and 200% wait time, no scaling, for a total
load of 300%.

So the CPU0-1 cluster has a 300% load and the CPU2 'cluster' has a 300%
load, even though the actual load is not actually equal, CPUs0-1
combined have the same capacity as CPU2, so it should be 4-4 tasks for
an equal balance.


So I'm not sure the claim of comparable between CPUs stands. Still it is
an interesting idea and I will consider it more.

  reply	other threads:[~2015-11-25  9:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-11-24 13:49 [PATCH] sched/fair: update scale invariance of pelt Vincent Guittot
2015-11-25  9:24 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-11-25 11:25   ` Vincent Guittot
2015-12-08 17:04 ` Morten Rasmussen
2015-12-15 10:18   ` Vincent Guittot
2015-12-14  0:26 ` Yuyang Du
2015-12-15 10:21   ` Vincent Guittot
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-03-28 15:35 [PATCH] sched/fair: update scale invariance of PELT Vincent Guittot
2017-03-29  8:05 ` Vincent Guittot

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=20151125092401.GY17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=pjt@google.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=yuyang.du@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