public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
To: Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@intel.com>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com,
	bsegall@google.com, pjt@google.com, morten.rasmussen@arm.com,
	vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 08/11] sched: Remove SD_WAKE_AFFINE flag and replace it with SD_BALANCE_WAKE
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 14:04:33 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160623130433.GF8415@codeblueprint.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1466041775-4528-9-git-send-email-yuyang.du@intel.com>

On Thu, 16 Jun, at 09:49:32AM, Yuyang Du wrote:
> SD_BALANCE_{FORK|EXEC|WAKE} flags are for select_task_rq() to select a
> CPU to run a new task or a waking task. SD_WAKE_AFFINE is a flag to
> try selecting the waker CPU to run the waking task.
> 
> SD_BALANCE_WAKE is not a sched_domain flag, but SD_WAKE_AFFINE is.
> Conceptually, SD_BALANCE_WAKE should be a sched_domain flag just like
> the other two, so we first make SD_BALANCE_WAKE a sched_domain flag.
> 
> Moreover, the semantic of SD_WAKE_AFFINE is included in the semantic
> of SD_BALANCE_WAKE. When in wakeup balancing, it is natual to try
> the waker CPU if the waker CPU is allowed, in that sense, we don't
> need a separate flag to specify it, not mentioning that SD_WAKE_AFFINE
> is almost enabled in every sched_domains.
> 
> With the above combined, there is no need to have SD_WAKE_AFFINE, so
> we remove and replace it with SD_BALANCE_WAKE. This can be accomplished
> without any functionality change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@intel.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/sched.h   |    1 -
>  kernel/sched/core.c     |    7 +++----
>  kernel/sched/deadline.c |    2 +-
>  kernel/sched/fair.c     |    9 ++++-----
>  kernel/sched/rt.c       |    2 +-
>  5 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index d74e757..0803abd 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -1014,7 +1014,6 @@ extern void wake_up_q(struct wake_q_head *head);
>  #define SD_BALANCE_EXEC		0x0004	/* Balance on exec */
>  #define SD_BALANCE_FORK		0x0008	/* Balance on fork, clone */
>  #define SD_BALANCE_WAKE		0x0010  /* Balance on wakeup */
> -#define SD_WAKE_AFFINE		0x0020	/* Wake task to waking CPU */
>  #define SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY	0x0080	/* Domain members share cpu power */
>  #define SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN	0x0100	/* Domain members share power domain */
>  #define SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES	0x0200	/* Domain members share cpu pkg resources */

I'm curious - doesn't this break userspace ABI? These flags are
exported via procfs, so I would have assumed removing or changing the
value of any of these constants would be forbidden.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-06-23 13:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-16  1:49 [RFC PATCH 00/11] Refactor select_task_rq_fair() Yuyang Du
2016-06-16  1:49 ` [RFC PATCH 01/11] sched: Remove unused @cpu argument from destroy_sched_domain*() Yuyang Du
2016-06-16  1:49 ` [RFC PATCH 02/11] sched: Restructure destroy_sched_domain() Yuyang Du
2016-06-16  1:49 ` [RFC PATCH 03/11] sched: Introduce struct sched_domain_shared Yuyang Du
2016-06-16  1:49 ` [RFC PATCH 04/11] sched: Replace sd_busy/nr_busy_cpus with sched_domain_shared Yuyang Du
2016-06-16  1:49 ` [RFC PATCH 05/11] sched: Rewrite select_idle_siblings() Yuyang Du
2016-06-16  1:49 ` [RFC PATCH 06/11] sched: Optimize SCHED_SMT Yuyang Du
2016-06-16  1:49 ` [RFC PATCH 07/11] sched: Clean up SD_BALANCE_WAKE flags in sched domain build-up Yuyang Du
2016-06-16  1:49 ` [RFC PATCH 08/11] sched: Remove SD_WAKE_AFFINE flag and replace it with SD_BALANCE_WAKE Yuyang Du
2016-06-23 13:04   ` Matt Fleming [this message]
2016-06-23 13:54     ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-23 14:06     ` Mike Galbraith
2016-06-16  1:49 ` [RFC PATCH 09/11] sched: Add per CPU variable sd_socket_id to specify the CPU's socket Yuyang Du
2016-06-16  1:49 ` [RFC PATCH 10/11] sched: Add sched_llc_complete static key to specify whether the LLC covers all CPUs Yuyang Du
2016-06-16  1:49 ` [RFC PATCH 11/11] sched/fair: Refactor select_task_rq_fair() Yuyang Du
2016-06-16  1:57   ` Yuyang Du

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=20160623130433.GF8415@codeblueprint.co.uk \
    --to=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pjt@google.com \
    --cc=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.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