From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S934155AbcATJKq (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 20 Jan 2016 04:10:46 -0500
Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:51769 "EHLO
	casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751627AbcATJJN (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 20 Jan 2016 04:09:13 -0500
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 10:09:06 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>,
        Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@ezchip.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] sched: Upload nohz full CPU load on task
 enqueue/dequeue
Message-ID: <20160120090906.GG6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1452700891-21807-1-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com>
 <1452700891-21807-5-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com>
 <20160119131708.GF6344@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20160119170317.GC5317@lerouge>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160119170317.GC5317@lerouge>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 06:03:19PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 02:17:08PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 05:01:31PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > The full nohz CPU load is currently accounted on tick restart only.
> > > But there are a few issues with this model:
> > > 
> > > _ On tick restart, if cpu_load[0] doesn't contain the load of the actual
> > >   tickless load that just ran, we are going to account a wrong value.
> > >   And it is very likely to be so given that cpu_load[0] doesn't have
> > >   an opportunity to be updated between tick stop and tick restart.
> > > 
> > > _ If the runqueue had updates that didn't trigger a tick restart, we
> > >   are going to miss those CPU load changes.
> > > 
> > > A solution to fix this is to update the CPU load everytime we enqueue
> > > or dequeue a task in the fair runqueue and more than a jiffy occured
> > > since the last update.
> > 
> > Would not a much better solution be to do this remotely instead of from
> > one of the hottest functions in the scheduler?
> 
> The problem with doing this remotely is that we can miss past cpu loads if
> there was several enqueue/dequeue operations happening while tickless.

Its a timer based sample, it _always_ and per definition misses
intermediate state.

You can simply do:

	for_each_nohzfull_cpu(cpu) {
		struct rq *rq = rq_of(cpu);

		raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock);
		update_cpu_load_active(rq);
		raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock);
	}

Also, since when can we have enqueues/dequeues while NOHZ_FULL ? I
thought that was the 1 task 100% cpu case, there are no
enqueues/dequeues there.