From: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
To: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, juri.lelli@gmail.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, kernel-team@lge.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] sched/deadline: Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:33:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170327143343.GP10289@e106622-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1490235169-370-1-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com>
Hi,
On 23/03/17 11:12, Byungchul Park wrote:
> When cpudl_find() returns any among free_cpus, the cpu might not be
> closer than others, considering sched domain. For example:
>
> this_cpu: 15
> free_cpus: 0, 1,..., 14 (== later_mask)
> best_cpu: 0
>
> topology:
>
> 0 --+
> +--+
> 1 --+ |
> +-- ... --+
> 2 --+ | |
> +--+ |
> 3 --+ |
>
> ... ...
>
> 12 --+ |
> +--+ |
> 13 --+ | |
> +-- ... -+
> 14 --+ |
> +--+
> 15 --+
>
> In this case, it would be best to select 14 since it's a free cpu and
> closest to 15(this_cpu). However, currently the code select 0(best_cpu)
> even though that's just any among free_cpus. Fix it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/deadline.c | 29 +++++++++++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> index a2ce590..49c93b9 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> @@ -1324,7 +1324,7 @@ static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task)
> struct sched_domain *sd;
> struct cpumask *later_mask = this_cpu_cpumask_var_ptr(local_cpu_mask_dl);
> int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
> - int best_cpu, cpu = task_cpu(task);
> + int cpu = task_cpu(task);
>
> /* Make sure the mask is initialized first */
> if (unlikely(!later_mask))
> @@ -1337,17 +1337,14 @@ static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task)
> * We have to consider system topology and task affinity
> * first, then we can look for a suitable cpu.
> */
> - best_cpu = cpudl_find(&task_rq(task)->rd->cpudl,
> - task, later_mask);
> - if (best_cpu == -1)
> + if (cpudl_find(&task_rq(task)->rd->cpudl, task, later_mask) == -1)
It seems that with this we loose the last user of the current return
value of cpudl_find() (heap maximum). I guess we want to change the
return value to be (int)bool, as in rt, so that we can simplify this and
the conditions in check_preempt_equal_dl.
> return -1;
>
> /*
> - * If we are here, some target has been found,
> - * the most suitable of which is cached in best_cpu.
> - * This is, among the runqueues where the current tasks
> - * have later deadlines than the task's one, the rq
> - * with the latest possible one.
> + * If we are here, some targets have been found, including
> + * the most suitable which is, among the runqueues where the
> + * current tasks have later deadlines than the task's one, the
> + * rq with the latest possible one.
> *
> * Now we check how well this matches with task's
> * affinity and system topology.
> @@ -1367,6 +1364,7 @@ static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task)
> rcu_read_lock();
> for_each_domain(cpu, sd) {
> if (sd->flags & SD_WAKE_AFFINE) {
> + int closest_cpu;
Can we still call this best_cpu, so that we are aligned with rt?
Thanks,
- Juri
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-27 14:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-23 2:12 [PATCH v3 1/3] sched/deadline: Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park
2017-03-23 2:12 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-03-23 2:12 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] sched/rt: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_lowest_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-03-23 9:21 ` Byungchul Park
2017-03-23 13:59 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-03-23 9:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-23 10:36 ` Byungchul Park
2017-03-23 14:08 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-03-23 22:45 ` Byungchul Park
2017-03-27 14:33 ` Juri Lelli [this message]
2017-03-28 0:04 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] sched/deadline: Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park
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=20170327143343.GP10289@e106622-lin \
--to=juri.lelli@arm.com \
--cc=byungchul.park@lge.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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