From: Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, clm@fb.com,
matt@codeblueprint.co.uk, mgalbraith@suse.de, tglx@linutronix.de,
fweisbec@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/7] sched: Rewrite select_idle_siblings()
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 05:05:50 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160510210550.GB4870@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160509105210.703304637@infradead.org>
On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 12:48:12PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> +/*
> + * Scan the LLC domain for idle CPUs; this is dynamically regulated by
> + * comparing the average scan cost (tracked in sd->avg_scan_cost) against the
tracked in this_sd->avg_scan_cost
> + * average idle time for this rq (as found in rq->avg_idle).
> + */
> +static int select_idle_cpu(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int target)
> +{
> + struct sched_domain *this_sd = rcu_dereference(*this_cpu_ptr(&sd_llc));
> + u64 avg_idle = this_rq()->avg_idle;
> + u64 avg_cost = this_sd->avg_scan_cost;
> + u64 time, cost;
> + s64 delta;
> + int cpu, wrap;
> +
> + /*
> + * Due to large variance we need a large fuzz factor; hackbench in
> + * particularly is sensitive here.
> + */
> + if ((avg_idle / 512) < avg_cost)
> + return -1;
> +
> + time = local_clock();
> +
> + for_each_cpu_wrap(cpu, sched_domain_span(sd), target, wrap) {
> + if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, tsk_cpus_allowed(p)))
> + continue;
> + if (idle_cpu(cpu))
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + time = local_clock() - time;
> + cost = this_sd->avg_scan_cost;
> + delta = (s64)(time - cost) / 8;
> + this_sd->avg_scan_cost += delta;
> +
> + return cpu;
> +}
[snip]
> +
> + i = select_idle_core(p, sd, target);
> + if ((unsigned)i < nr_cpumask_bits)
> + return i;
> +
> + i = select_idle_cpu(p, sd, target);
> + if ((unsigned)i < nr_cpumask_bits)
> + return i;
> +
> + i = select_idle_smt(p, sd, target);
> + if ((unsigned)i < nr_cpumask_bits)
> + return i;
First, on smt, these three scans have a lot of overlap, but it also has an
effect of opportunistic-spinning if it was intended, which is good. Anyway,
maybe you should write something about it, and why only consider cost for cpu,
not core.
Then, I am still considering combining them a bit, like the following patch.
And if you want, more might be combined.
P.S., The idle_smt_cpu may not be the first idle, but one more i++ can make
it.
---
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 25bd5b0..648a15c 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -5281,7 +5281,7 @@ unlock:
static int select_idle_core(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int target)
{
struct cpumask *cpus = this_cpu_cpumask_var_ptr(select_idle_mask);
- int core, cpu, wrap;
+ int core, cpu, wrap, i = 0, idle_smt_cpu = -1;
if (!static_branch_likely(&sched_smt_present))
return -1;
@@ -5298,8 +5298,14 @@ static int select_idle_core(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int
cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, cpus);
if (!idle_cpu(cpu))
idle = false;
+ /*
+ * First smt must be target's smt, and any cpu here is allowed
+ */
+ else if (i == 0)
+ idle_smt_cpu = cpu;
}
+ i++;
if (idle)
return core;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-11 4:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-09 10:48 [RFC][PATCH 0/7] sched: select_idle_siblings rewrite Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-09 10:48 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/7] sched: Remove unused @cpu argument from destroy_sched_domain*() Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-09 10:48 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/7] sched: Restructure destroy_sched_domain() Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-09 14:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-09 10:48 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/7] sched: Introduce struct sched_domain_shared Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-09 10:48 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/7] sched: Replace sd_busy/nr_busy_cpus with sched_domain_shared Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-11 11:55 ` Matt Fleming
2016-05-11 12:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-11 18:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-11 18:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-12 2:05 ` Michael Neuling
2016-05-12 5:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-12 11:07 ` Michael Neuling
2016-05-12 11:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-13 0:12 ` Michael Neuling
2016-05-16 14:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-17 10:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-17 10:52 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2016-05-17 11:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-11 17:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-11 18:04 ` Matt Fleming
2016-05-16 15:31 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2016-05-16 17:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-16 17:26 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2016-05-09 10:48 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/7] sched: Rewrite select_idle_siblings() Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-10 21:05 ` Yuyang Du [this message]
2016-05-11 7:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-10 23:42 ` Yuyang Du
2016-05-11 7:43 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-05-09 10:48 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/7] sched: Optimize SCHED_SMT Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-09 10:48 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/7] sched: debug muck -- not for merging Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-10 0:50 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/7] sched: select_idle_siblings rewrite Chris Mason
2016-05-11 14:19 ` Chris Mason
2016-05-18 5:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 8/7] sched/fair: Use utilization distance to filter affine sync wakeups Mike Galbraith
2016-05-19 21:43 ` Rik van Riel
2016-05-20 2:52 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-05-25 14:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/7] sched: select_idle_siblings rewrite Chris Mason
2016-05-25 16:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-25 17:11 ` Chris Mason
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=20160510210550.GB4870@intel.com \
--to=yuyang.du@intel.com \
--cc=clm@fb.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=mgalbraith@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).