public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Gautham R Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Parth Shah <parth@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] sched/fair: wake_affine improvements
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 16:09:40 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210426103940.GJ2633526@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210423082532.GA4239@techsingularity.net>

* Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> [2021-04-23 09:25:32]:

> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 03:53:16PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > Recently we found that some of the benchmark numbers on Power10 were lesser
> > than expected. Some analysis showed that the problem lies in the fact that
> > L2-Cache on Power10 is at core level i.e only 4 threads share the L2-cache.
> > 
> 
> I didn't get the chance to review this properly although I am suspicious
> of tracking idle_core and updating that more frequently. It becomes a very
> hot cache line that bounces. I did experiement with tracking an idle core
> but the data either went stale too quickly or the updates incurred more
> overhead than a reduced search saved.
> 

This change does increase the number of times we read the idle-core.  There
are also more places where we try to update the idle-core. However I feel
the number of times, we actually update the idle-core now will be much
lesser than previous, because we are mostly doing a conditional update. i.e
we are updating the idle-core only if the waking up CPU happens to be part
of our core.

Also if the system is mostly lightly loaded, we check for
available_idle_cpu, so we may not look for an idle-core. If the system is
running a CPU intensive task, then the idle-core will most likely to be -1.
Its only the cases where the system utilization keeps swinging between
lightly loaded to heavy load, that we would end up checking and setting
idle-core.

Do let me know your thoughts.

-- 
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-04-26 10:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-22 10:23 [PATCH 00/10] sched/fair: wake_affine improvements Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-22 10:23 ` [PATCH 01/10] sched/fair: Update affine statistics when needed Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-22 10:23 ` [PATCH 02/10] sched/fair: Maintain the identity of idle-core Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-22 10:23 ` [PATCH 03/10] sched/fair: Update idle-core more often Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-22 10:23 ` [PATCH 04/10] sched/fair: Prefer idle CPU to cache affinity Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-22 10:23 ` [PATCH 05/10] sched/fair: Call wake_affine only if necessary Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-22 10:23 ` [PATCH 06/10] sched/idle: Move busy_cpu accounting to idle callback Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-22 10:23 ` [PATCH 07/10] sched/fair: Remove ifdefs in waker_affine_idler_llc Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-22 10:23 ` [PATCH 08/10] sched/fair: Dont iterate if no idle CPUs Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-22 10:23 ` [PATCH 09/10] sched/topology: Introduce fallback LLC Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-22 15:10   ` kernel test robot
2021-04-22 10:23 ` [PATCH 10/10] powerpc/smp: Add fallback flag to powerpc MC domain Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-23  8:25 ` [PATCH 00/10] sched/fair: wake_affine improvements Mel Gorman
2021-04-23 10:31   ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-23 12:38     ` Mel Gorman
2021-04-26 10:30       ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-26 11:35         ` Mel Gorman
2021-04-26 10:39   ` Srikar Dronamraju [this message]
2021-04-26 11:41     ` Mel Gorman
2021-04-28 12:57       ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-27 14:52 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-04-28 12:49   ` Srikar Dronamraju

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=20210426103940.GJ2633526@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=parth@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=riel@surriel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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