From: Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Tao Zhou <ouwen210@hotmail.com>,
Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched/fair: enqueue_task_fair optimization
Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 09:18:08 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200513131808.GG12425@lorien.usersys.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtDYmi9wz3r1G8baG2cM3wh6004CDT11HaAu8L7-wWv=Gw@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 03:15:53PM +0200 Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 15:13, Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 03:10:28PM +0200 Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 14:45, Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Vincent,
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 02:33:35PM +0200 Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > > > enqueue_task_fair jumps to enqueue_throttle label when cfs_rq_of(se) is
> > > > > throttled which means that se can't be NULL and we can skip the test.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > s/be NULL/be non-NULL/
> > > >
> > > > I think.
> > >
> > > This sentence refers to the move of enqueue_throttle and the fact that
> > > se can't be null when goto enqueue_throttle and we can jump directly
> > > after the if statement, which is now removed in v2 because se is
> > > always NULL if we don't use goto enqueue_throttle.
> > >
> > > I haven't change the commit message for the remove of if statement
> > >
> >
> > Fair enough, it just seems backwards from the intent of the patch now.
> >
> > There is also an extra } after the update_overutilized_status.
>
> don't know what I did but it's crap. sorry about that
>
No worries. I didn't see it when I read it either. The compiler told me :)
> Let me prepare a v3
>
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Phil
> >
> >
> >
> > > >
> > > > It's more like if it doesn't jump to the label then se must be NULL for
> > > > the loop to terminate. The final loop is a NOP if se is NULL. The check
> > > > wasn't protecting that.
> > > >
> > > > Otherwise still
> > > >
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Phil
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > > > v2 changes:
> > > > > - Remove useless if statement
> > > > >
> > > > > kernel/sched/fair.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> > > > > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > > > > index a0c690d57430..b51b12d63c39 100644
> > > > > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > > > > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > > > > @@ -5513,28 +5513,29 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
> > > > > list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > -enqueue_throttle:
> > > > > - if (!se) {
> > > > > - add_nr_running(rq, 1);
> > > > > - /*
> > > > > - * Since new tasks are assigned an initial util_avg equal to
> > > > > - * half of the spare capacity of their CPU, tiny tasks have the
> > > > > - * ability to cross the overutilized threshold, which will
> > > > > - * result in the load balancer ruining all the task placement
> > > > > - * done by EAS. As a way to mitigate that effect, do not account
> > > > > - * for the first enqueue operation of new tasks during the
> > > > > - * overutilized flag detection.
> > > > > - *
> > > > > - * A better way of solving this problem would be to wait for
> > > > > - * the PELT signals of tasks to converge before taking them
> > > > > - * into account, but that is not straightforward to implement,
> > > > > - * and the following generally works well enough in practice.
> > > > > - */
> > > > > - if (flags & ENQUEUE_WAKEUP)
> > > > > - update_overutilized_status(rq);
> > > > > + /* At this point se is NULL and we are at root level*/
> > > > > + add_nr_running(rq, 1);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + /*
> > > > > + * Since new tasks are assigned an initial util_avg equal to
> > > > > + * half of the spare capacity of their CPU, tiny tasks have the
> > > > > + * ability to cross the overutilized threshold, which will
> > > > > + * result in the load balancer ruining all the task placement
> > > > > + * done by EAS. As a way to mitigate that effect, do not account
> > > > > + * for the first enqueue operation of new tasks during the
> > > > > + * overutilized flag detection.
> > > > > + *
> > > > > + * A better way of solving this problem would be to wait for
> > > > > + * the PELT signals of tasks to converge before taking them
> > > > > + * into account, but that is not straightforward to implement,
> > > > > + * and the following generally works well enough in practice.
> > > > > + */
> > > > > + if (flags & ENQUEUE_WAKEUP)
> > > > > + update_overutilized_status(rq);
> > > > >
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > +enqueue_throttle:
> > > > > if (cfs_bandwidth_used()) {
> > > > > /*
> > > > > * When bandwidth control is enabled; the cfs_rq_throttled()
> > > > > --
> > > > > 2.17.1
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> >
>
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-13 13:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-13 12:33 [PATCH v2] sched/fair: enqueue_task_fair optimization Vincent Guittot
2020-05-13 12:45 ` Phil Auld
2020-05-13 13:10 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-05-13 13:13 ` Phil Auld
2020-05-13 13:15 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-05-13 13:18 ` Phil Auld [this message]
2020-05-13 13:25 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-05-13 13:31 ` Phil Auld
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=20200513131808.GG12425@lorien.usersys.redhat.com \
--to=pauld@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=ouwen210@hotmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pkondeti@codeaurora.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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