From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
To: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, juri.lelli@gmail.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, kernel-team@lge.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] sched/rt: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_lowest_rq()
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 21:12:34 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170810121234.GE20323@X58A-UD3R> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1502077834-11137-3-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com>
On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 12:50:34PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> It would be better to avoid pushing tasks to other cpu within
> a SD_PREFER_SIBLING domain, instead, get more chances to check other
> siblings.
I applied your suggestion. Could you let me know your opinions about
this?
>
> Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/rt.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/rt.c b/kernel/sched/rt.c
> index 979b734..50639e5 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/rt.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c
> @@ -1618,12 +1618,35 @@ static struct task_struct *pick_highest_pushable_task(struct rq *rq, int cpu)
>
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(cpumask_var_t, local_cpu_mask);
>
> +/*
> + * Find the first cpu in: mask & sd & ~prefer
> + */
> +static int find_cpu(const struct cpumask *mask,
> + const struct sched_domain *sd,
> + const struct sched_domain *prefer)
> +{
> + const struct cpumask *sds = sched_domain_span(sd);
> + const struct cpumask *ps = prefer ? sched_domain_span(prefer) : NULL;
> + int cpu = -1;
> +
> + while ((cpu = cpumask_next(cpu, mask)) < nr_cpu_ids) {
> + if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, sds))
> + continue;
> + if (ps && cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, ps))
> + continue;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + return cpu;
> +}
> +
> static int find_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task)
> {
> - struct sched_domain *sd;
> + struct sched_domain *sd, *prefer = NULL;
> struct cpumask *lowest_mask = this_cpu_cpumask_var_ptr(local_cpu_mask);
> int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
> int cpu = task_cpu(task);
> + int fallback_cpu = -1;
>
> /* Make sure the mask is initialized first */
> if (unlikely(!lowest_mask))
> @@ -1668,9 +1691,20 @@ static int find_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task)
> return this_cpu;
> }
>
> - best_cpu = cpumask_first_and(lowest_mask,
> - sched_domain_span(sd));
> + best_cpu = find_cpu(lowest_mask, sd, prefer);
> +
> if (best_cpu < nr_cpu_ids) {
> + /*
> + * If current domain is SD_PREFER_SIBLING
> + * flaged, we have to get more chances to
> + * check other siblings.
> + */
> + if (sd->flags & SD_PREFER_SIBLING) {
> + prefer = sd;
> + if (fallback_cpu == -1)
> + fallback_cpu = best_cpu;
> + continue;
> + }
> rcu_read_unlock();
> return best_cpu;
> }
> @@ -1679,6 +1713,13 @@ static int find_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task)
> rcu_read_unlock();
>
> /*
> + * If fallback_cpu is valid, all our quesses failed *except* for
> + * SD_PREFER_SIBLING domain. Now, we can return the fallback cpu.
> + */
> + if (fallback_cpu != -1)
> + return fallback_cpu;
> +
> + /*
> * And finally, if there were no matches within the domains
> * just give the caller *something* to work with from the compatible
> * locations.
> --
> 1.9.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-10 12:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-07 3:50 [PATCH v6 0/2] Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park
2017-08-07 3:50 ` [PATCH v6 1/2] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-08-15 15:19 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-08-16 0:38 ` Byungchul Park
2017-08-16 1:42 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-08-16 2:17 ` Byungchul Park
2017-08-16 13:32 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-08-16 14:04 ` Byungchul Park
2017-08-16 14:25 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-08-07 3:50 ` [PATCH v6 2/2] sched/rt: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_lowest_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-08-10 12:12 ` Byungchul Park [this message]
2017-08-18 1:25 ` [PATCH v6 0/2] Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park
2017-08-18 4:51 ` Joel Fernandes (Google)
2017-08-18 5:34 ` 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=20170810121234.GE20323@X58A-UD3R \
--to=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