From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: mgorman@techsingularity.net, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com,
efault@gmx.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
matt@codeblueprint.co.uk, peterz@infradead.org,
ggherdovich@suse.cz
Cc: linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au
Subject: Re: [tip:sched/core] sched/numa: Delay retrying placement for automatic NUMA balance after wake_affine()
Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 04:06:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180507110607.GA3828@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <tip-7347fc87dfe6b7315e74310ee1243dc222c68086@git.kernel.org>
Hi Mel,
I do see performance improving with this commit 7347fc87df "sched/numa:
Delay retrying placement for automatic NUMA balance after wake_affine()"
even on powerpc where we have SD_WAKE_AFFINE *disabled* on numa sched
domains. Ideally this commit should not have affected powerpc machines.
That made me to look a bit deeper.
> @@ -1876,7 +1877,18 @@ static void numa_migrate_preferred(struct task_struct *p)
>
> /* Periodically retry migrating the task to the preferred node */
> interval = min(interval, msecs_to_jiffies(p->numa_scan_period) / 16);
> - p->numa_migrate_retry = jiffies + interval;
> + numa_migrate_retry = jiffies + interval;
> +
> + /*
> + * Check that the new retry threshold is after the current one. If
> + * the retry is in the future, it implies that wake_affine has
> + * temporarily asked NUMA balancing to backoff from placement.
> + */
> + if (numa_migrate_retry > p->numa_migrate_retry)
> + return;
The above check looks wrong. This check will most likely to be true,
numa_migrate_preferred() itself is called either when jiffies >
p->numa_migrate_retry or if the task's numa_preferred_nid has changed.
Hence we never end up calling task_numa_migrate() i.e we never go thro
the active cpu balancing path in numa balancing.
Reading the comments just above the check, makes me think the check
should have been
if (numa_migrate_retry < p->numa_migrate_retry)
return;
Here is perf stat output with 7347fc87df running perf bench numa mem
--no-data_rand_walk 96 -p 2 -t 48 -G 0 -P 3072 -T 0 -l 50 -c -s 1000
2,13,898 cs ( +- 2.65% )
10,228 migrations ( +- 14.61% )
21,86,406 faults ( +- 9.69% )
40,65,84,68,026 cache-misses ( +- 0.31% )
0 sched:sched_move_numa <---------------
0 sched:sched_stick_numa <---------------
0 sched:sched_swap_numa <---------------
1,41,780 migrate:mm_migrate_pages ( +- 24.11% )
0 migrate:mm_numa_migrate_ratelimit
778.331602169 seconds time elapsed
If you look at sched_move_numa, sched_stick_numa, sched_swap_numa
numbers, its very clear that we did try any active cpu migrations.
Same command with the commit reverted
2,38,685 cs ( +- 2.93% )
25,127 migrations ( +- 13.22% )
17,27,858 faults ( +- 2.61% )
34,77,06,21,298 cache-misses ( +- 0.61% )
560 sched:sched_move_numa ( +- 2.05% )
16 sched:sched_stick_numa ( +- 33.33% )
310 sched:sched_swap_numa ( +- 15.16% )
1,25,062 migrate:mm_migrate_pages ( +- 0.91% )
0 migrate:mm_numa_migrate_ratelimit
916.777315465 seconds time elapsed
(numbers are almost same with just that check commented/modified)
So we are seeing an improvement, but the improvement is because of
bypassing the active cpu balancing. Do we really want to by-pass this
code?
> +
> + /* Safe to try placing the task on the preferred node */
> + p->numa_migrate_retry = numa_migrate_retry;
>
> /* Success if task is already running on preferred CPU */
> if (task_node(p) == p->numa_preferred_nid)
> @@ -5759,6 +5771,48 @@ wake_affine_weight(struct sched_domain *sd, struct task_struct *p,
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-07 11:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-13 13:37 [PATCH 0/6] Reduce migrations and conflicts with automatic NUMA balancing v2 Mel Gorman
2018-02-13 13:37 ` [PATCH 1/6] sched/fair: Avoid an unnecessary lookup of current CPU ID during wake_affine Mel Gorman
2018-02-21 10:27 ` [tip:sched/core] " tip-bot for Mel Gorman
2018-02-13 13:37 ` [PATCH 2/6] sched/fair: Defer calculation of prev_eff_load in wake_affine until needed Mel Gorman
2018-02-21 10:28 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/fair: Defer calculation of 'prev_eff_load' in wake_affine_weight() " tip-bot for Mel Gorman
2018-02-13 13:37 ` [PATCH 3/6] sched/fair: Do not migrate on wake_affine_weight if weights are equal Mel Gorman
2018-02-21 10:28 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/fair: Do not migrate on wake_affine_weight() " tip-bot for Mel Gorman
2018-02-13 13:37 ` [PATCH 4/6] sched/fair: Do not migrate due to a sync wakeup on exit Mel Gorman
2018-02-21 10:29 ` [tip:sched/core] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-13 13:37 ` [PATCH 5/6] sched/fair: Consider SD_NUMA when selecting the most idle group to schedule on Mel Gorman
2018-02-21 10:29 ` [tip:sched/core] " tip-bot for Mel Gorman
2018-02-13 13:37 ` [PATCH 6/6] sched/numa: Delay retrying placement for automatic NUMA balance after wake_affine Mel Gorman
2018-02-13 14:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-13 14:18 ` Mel Gorman
2018-02-13 14:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-13 15:00 ` Mel Gorman
2018-02-13 15:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-21 10:30 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/numa: Delay retrying placement for automatic NUMA balance after wake_affine() tip-bot for Mel Gorman
2018-05-07 11:06 ` Srikar Dronamraju [this message]
2018-05-09 8:41 ` Mel Gorman
2018-05-09 10:58 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-05-09 16:34 ` Mel Gorman
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=20180507110607.GA3828@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=ggherdovich@suse.cz \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).