From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
To: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, juri.lelli@gmail.com, kernel-team@lge.com
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v11 1/2] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq()
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 17:39:14 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171027083914.GB23798@X58A-UD3R> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1507617474-21816-2-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com>
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 03:37:53PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> It would be better to try to check other siblings first if
> SD_PREFER_SIBLING is flaged when pushing tasks - migration.
Hello everyone,
Could you tell me opinions?
> Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
> Acked-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/deadline.c | 82 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> index 0223694..d619c07 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> @@ -1319,12 +1319,35 @@ static struct task_struct *pick_earliest_pushable_dl_task(struct rq *rq, int cpu
>
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(cpumask_var_t, local_cpu_mask_dl);
>
> +/*
> + * 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;
> +
> + for_each_cpu(cpu, mask) {
> + if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, sds))
> + continue;
> + if (ps && cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, ps))
> + continue;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + return cpu;
> +}
> +
> static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task)
> {
> - struct sched_domain *sd;
> + struct sched_domain *sd, *prefer = NULL;
> struct cpumask *later_mask = this_cpu_cpumask_var_ptr(local_cpu_mask_dl);
> int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
> int cpu = task_cpu(task);
> + int fallback_cpu = -1;
>
> /* Make sure the mask is initialized first */
> if (unlikely(!later_mask))
> @@ -1376,15 +1399,37 @@ static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task)
> return this_cpu;
> }
>
> - best_cpu = cpumask_first_and(later_mask,
> - sched_domain_span(sd));
> /*
> - * Last chance: if a cpu being in both later_mask
> - * and current sd span is valid, that becomes our
> - * choice. Of course, the latest possible cpu is
> - * already under consideration through later_mask.
> + * If a cpu exists that is in the later_mask and
> + * the current sd span, but not in the prefer sd
> + * span, then that becomes our choice.
> + *
> + * Of course, the latest possible cpu is already
> + * under consideration through later_mask.
> */
> + best_cpu = find_cpu(later_mask, sd, prefer);
> +
> if (best_cpu < nr_cpu_ids) {
> + /*
> + * If current domain is SD_PREFER_SIBLING
> + * flaged, we have to try to check other
> + * siblings first.
> + */
> + if (sd->flags & SD_PREFER_SIBLING) {
> + prefer = sd;
> +
> + /*
> + * fallback_cpu should be one
> + * in the closest domain among
> + * SD_PREFER_SIBLING domains,
> + * in case that more than one
> + * SD_PREFER_SIBLING domains
> + * exist in the hierachy.
> + */
> + if (fallback_cpu == -1)
> + fallback_cpu = best_cpu;
> + continue;
> + }
> rcu_read_unlock();
> return best_cpu;
> }
> @@ -1393,6 +1438,29 @@ static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task)
> rcu_read_unlock();
>
> /*
> + * If fallback_cpu is valid, all our guesses failed *except* for
> + * SD_PREFER_SIBLING domain. Now, we can return the fallback cpu.
> + *
> + * XXX: Consider the following example, 4 cores SMT2 system:
> + *
> + * LLC [0 - 7]
> + * SMT [0 1][2 3][4 5][6 7]
> + * o x o x x x x x
> + *
> + * where 'o': occupied and 'x': empty.
> + *
> + * A wakeup on cpu0 will exclude cpu1 and choose cpu3, since
> + * cpu1 is in a SD_PREFER_SIBLING sd and cpu3 is not. However,
> + * in this case, cpu4 would have been a better choice, since
> + * cpu3 is a (SMT) thread of an already loaded core.
> + *
> + * Doing it 'right' is difficult and expensive. The current
> + * solution is an acceptable approximation.
> + */
> + if (fallback_cpu != -1)
> + return fallback_cpu;
> +
> + /*
> * At this point, all our guesses failed, we just return
> * 'something', and let the caller sort the things out.
> */
> --
> 1.9.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-27 8:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-10 6:37 [RESEND PATCH v11 0/2] Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park
2017-10-10 6:37 ` [RESEND PATCH v11 1/2] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-10-23 8:44 ` Byungchul Park
2017-10-27 8:39 ` Byungchul Park [this message]
2017-10-10 6:37 ` [RESEND PATCH v11 2/2] sched/rt: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_lowest_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-10-12 8:00 ` [RESEND PATCH v11 0/2] Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-11-02 1:25 Byungchul Park
2017-11-02 1:25 ` [RESEND PATCH v11 1/2] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-12-19 1:20 [RESEND PATCH v11 0/2] Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park
2017-12-19 1:20 ` [RESEND PATCH v11 1/2] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-12-28 23:32 [RESEND PATCH v11 0/2] Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park
2017-12-28 23:32 ` [RESEND PATCH v11 1/2] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq() Byungchul Park
2018-01-08 6:14 [RESEND PATCH v11 0/2] Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park
2018-01-08 6:14 ` [RESEND PATCH v11 1/2] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq() Byungchul Park
2018-01-10 17:22 ` kbuild test robot
2018-01-11 7:48 ` Byungchul Park
2018-05-09 6:44 [RESEND PATCH v11 0/2] Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park
2018-05-09 6:44 ` [RESEND PATCH v11 1/2] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq() 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=20171027083914.GB23798@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