From: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
To: mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kprateek.nayak@amd.com
Cc: sshegde@linux.ibm.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
vschneid@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] sched/fair: Move checking for nohz cpus after time check
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2025 00:01:43 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251201183146.74443-2-sshegde@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251201183146.74443-1-sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
Idle load balancer is kicked off only after time check. So move
the atomic read after the time check.
If there are no nohz CPUs there likely has_blocked should be reset
too. So stats load balancing shouldn't much difference.
Signed-off-by: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
---
kernel/sched/fair.c | 13 ++++++-------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 769d7b7990df..61cc3fdfa45b 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -12440,19 +12440,18 @@ static void nohz_balancer_kick(struct rq *rq)
*/
nohz_balance_exit_idle(rq);
- /*
- * None are in tickless mode and hence no need for NOHZ idle load
- * balancing:
- */
- if (likely(!atomic_read(&nohz.nr_cpus)))
- return;
-
if (READ_ONCE(nohz.has_blocked) &&
time_after(now, READ_ONCE(nohz.next_blocked)))
flags = NOHZ_STATS_KICK;
if (time_before(now, nohz.next_balance))
goto out;
+ /*
+ * None are in tickless mode and hence no need for NOHZ idle load
+ * balancing:
+ */
+ if (likely(!atomic_read(&nohz.nr_cpus)))
+ return;
if (rq->nr_running >= 2) {
flags = NOHZ_STATS_KICK | NOHZ_BALANCE_KICK;
--
2.43.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-01 18:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-01 18:31 [PATCH 0/4] sched/fair: improve nohz fields for large systems Shrikanth Hegde
2025-12-01 18:31 ` Shrikanth Hegde [this message]
2025-12-01 18:31 ` [PATCH 2/4] sched/fair: Change likelyhood of nohz nr_cpus check Shrikanth Hegde
2025-12-01 18:31 ` [PATCH 3/4] sched/fair: Check for blocked task after time check Shrikanth Hegde
2025-12-02 6:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2025-12-02 6:55 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-12-01 18:31 ` [PATCH 4/4] sched/fair: Remove atomic nr_cpus and use cpumask instead Shrikanth Hegde
2025-12-01 19:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2025-12-02 5:29 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-12-02 7:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2025-12-02 14:35 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-12-02 16:14 ` Ingo Molnar
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=20251201183146.74443-2-sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
--to=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
/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