public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org,
	peterz@infradead.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
	dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, morten.rasmussen@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/7] sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 16:45:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200702154514.GA1072702@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <jhjk0zm7zv8.mognet@arm.com>

On Thursday 02 Jul 2020 at 15:31:07 (+0100), Valentin Schneider wrote:
> There an "interesting" quirk of asym_cpu_capacity_level() in that it does
> something slightly different than what it says on the tin: it detects
> the lowest topology level where *the biggest* CPU capacity is visible by
> all CPUs. That works just fine on big.LITTLE, but there are questionable
> DynamIQ topologies that could hit some issues.
> 
> Consider:
> 
> DIE [                   ]
> MC  [             ][    ] <- sd_asym_cpucapacity
>      0   1   2   3  4  5
>      L   L   B   B  B  B
> 
> asym_cpu_capacity_level() would pick MC as the asymmetric topology level,
> and you can argue either way: it should be DIE, because that's where CPUs 4
> and 5 can see a LITTLE, or it should be MC, at least for CPUs 0-3 because
> there they see all CPU capacities.

Right, I am not looking forward to these topologies...

> I have a plan on how to fix that, but I haven't been made aware of any
> "real" topology that would seriously break there. The moment one does, this
> will surface up to the top of my todo-list.
> 
> In the meantime, we can make it match the SDF_SHARED_PARENT semantics, and
> this actually fixes an issue with solo big CPU clusters (which I
> anecdotally found out while first writing this series, and forgot to
> include):
> 
> --->8
> From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
> Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 18:12:12 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH 1/1] sched/topology: Propagate SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY upwards
> 
> We currently set this flag *only* on domains whose topology level exactly
> match the level where we detect asymmetry (as returned by
> asym_cpu_capacity_level()). This is rather problematic.
> 
> Say there are two clusters in the system, one with a lone big CPU and the
> other with a mix of big and LITTLE CPUs:
> 
> DIE [                ]
> MC  [             ][ ]
>      0   1   2   3  4
>      L   L   B   B  B
> 
> asym_cpu_capacity_level() will figure out that the MC level is the one
> where all CPUs can see a CPU of max capacity, and we will thus set
> SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY at MC level for all CPUs.
> 
> That lone big CPU will degenerate its MC domain, since it would be alone in
> there, and will end up with just a DIE domain. Since the flag was only set
> at MC, this CPU ends up not seeing any SD with the flag set, which is
> broken.

+1

> Rather than clearing dflags at every topology level, clear it before
> entering the topology level loop. This will properly propagate upwards
> flags that are set starting from a certain level.

I'm feeling a bit nervous about that asymmetry -- in your example
select_idle_capacity() on, say, CPU3 will see less CPUs than on CPU4.
So, you might get fun side-effects where all task migrated to CPUs 0-3
will be 'stuck' there while CPU 4 stays mostly idle.

I have a few ideas to avoid that (e.g. looking at the rd span in
select_idle_capacity() instead of sd_asym_cpucapacity) but all this is
theoretical, so I'm happy to wait for a real platform to be released
before we worry too much about it.

In the meantime:

Reviewed-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/topology.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/topology.c b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> index b5667a273bf6..549268249645 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/topology.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> @@ -1965,11 +1965,10 @@ build_sched_domains(const struct cpumask *cpu_map, struct sched_domain_attr *att
>         /* Set up domains for CPUs specified by the cpu_map: */
>         for_each_cpu(i, cpu_map) {
>                 struct sched_domain_topology_level *tl;
> +		int dflags = 0;
> 
>                 sd = NULL;
>                 for_each_sd_topology(tl) {
> -			int dflags = 0;
> -
>                         if (tl == tl_asym) {
>                                 dflags |= SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY;
>                                 has_asym = true;
> --
> 2.27.0

Thanks,
Quentin

  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-02 15:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-01 19:06 [PATCH v3 0/7] sched: Instrument sched domain flags Valentin Schneider
2020-07-01 19:06 ` [PATCH v3 1/7] sched/topology: Split out SD_* flags declaration to its own file Valentin Schneider
2020-07-01 19:06 ` [PATCH v3 2/7] sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata Valentin Schneider
2020-07-02 12:15   ` Quentin Perret
2020-07-02 14:31     ` Valentin Schneider
2020-07-02 15:45       ` Quentin Perret [this message]
2020-07-02 16:25         ` Valentin Schneider
2020-07-02 16:37           ` Quentin Perret
2020-07-02 16:49             ` Valentin Schneider
2020-07-01 19:06 ` [PATCH v3 3/7] sched/topology: Verify SD_* flags setup when sched_debug is on Valentin Schneider
2020-07-02 14:20   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-07-02 14:32     ` Valentin Schneider
2020-07-01 19:06 ` [PATCH v3 4/7] arm, sched/topology: Remove SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN Valentin Schneider
2020-07-02 16:44   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-07-02 18:46     ` Valentin Schneider
2020-07-01 19:06 ` [PATCH v3 5/7] sched/topology: Add more flags to the SD degeneration mask Valentin Schneider
2020-07-02 18:28   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-07-01 19:06 ` [PATCH v3 6/7] sched/topology: Introduce SD metaflag for flags needing > 1 groups Valentin Schneider
2020-07-02 18:29   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-07-02 18:46     ` Valentin Schneider
2020-07-13 12:39   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-07-13 13:25     ` Valentin Schneider
2020-07-01 19:06 ` [PATCH v3 7/7] sched/topology: Use prebuilt SD flag degeneration mask Valentin Schneider
2020-07-13 12:55   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-07-13 13:28     ` Valentin Schneider
2020-07-13 13:43       ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-07-13 13:52         ` Valentin Schneider

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=20200702154514.GA1072702@google.com \
    --to=qperret@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --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