From: "Li, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
To: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@intel.com>,
Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>,
Jiang Biao <benbjiang@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3] sched/fair: select idle cpu from idle cpumask for task wakeup
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 19:52:22 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <27f88d6a-302e-2c28-c936-22ac233fe175@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <jhjimamz1dv.mognet@arm.com>
Hi Valentin,
Thanks for your reply.
On 2020/11/4 3:27, Valentin Schneider wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 21/10/20 16:03, Aubrey Li wrote:
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index 6b3b59cc51d6..088d1995594f 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -6023,6 +6023,38 @@ void __update_idle_core(struct rq *rq)
>> rcu_read_unlock();
>> }
>>
>> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, cpu_idle_state);
>
> I would've expected this to be far less compact than a cpumask, but that's
> not the story readelf is telling me. Objdump tells me this is recouping
> some of the padding in .data..percpu, at least with the arm64 defconfig.
>
> In any case this ought to be better wrt cacheline bouncing, which I suppose
> is what we ultimately want here.
Yes, every CPU has a byte, so it may not be less than a cpumask. Probably I can
put it into struct rq, do you have any better suggestions?
>
> Also, see rambling about init value below.
>
>> @@ -10070,6 +10107,12 @@ static void nohz_balancer_kick(struct rq *rq)
>> if (unlikely(rq->idle_balance))
>> return;
>>
>> + /* The CPU is not in idle, update idle cpumask */
>> + if (unlikely(sched_idle_cpu(cpu))) {
>> + /* Allow SCHED_IDLE cpu as a wakeup target */
>> + update_idle_cpumask(rq, true);
>> + } else
>> + update_idle_cpumask(rq, false);
>
> This means that without CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON, a CPU going into idle will
> never be accounted as going out of it, right? Eventually the cpumask
> should end up full, which conceptually implements the previous behaviour of
> select_idle_cpu() but in a fairly roundabout way...
Maybe I can move it to scheduler_tick().
>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/topology.c b/kernel/sched/topology.c
>> index 9079d865a935..f14a6ef4de57 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/topology.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/topology.c
>> @@ -1407,6 +1407,7 @@ sd_init(struct sched_domain_topology_level *tl,
>> sd->shared = *per_cpu_ptr(sdd->sds, sd_id);
>> atomic_inc(&sd->shared->ref);
>> atomic_set(&sd->shared->nr_busy_cpus, sd_weight);
>> + cpumask_copy(sds_idle_cpus(sd->shared), sched_domain_span(sd));
>
> So at init you would have (single LLC for sake of simplicity):
>
> \all cpu : cpu_idle_state[cpu] == false
> cpumask_full(sds_idle_cpus) == true
>
> IOW it'll require all CPUs to go idle at some point for these two states to
> be properly aligned. Should cpu_idle_state not then be init'd to 1?
>
> This then happens again for hotplug, except that cpu_idle_state[cpu] may be
> either true or false when the sds_idle_cpus mask is reset to 1's.
>
okay, will refine this in the next version.
Thanks,
-Aubrey
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-04 11:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-21 15:03 [RFC PATCH v3] sched/fair: select idle cpu from idle cpumask for task wakeup Aubrey Li
2020-11-03 19:27 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-11-04 11:52 ` Li, Aubrey [this message]
2020-11-06 21:22 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-11-06 7:58 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-11-09 6:05 ` Li, Aubrey
2020-11-06 21:20 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-11-09 13:40 ` Li, Aubrey
2020-11-09 15:54 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-11-11 8:38 ` Li, Aubrey
2020-11-12 10:57 ` Qais Yousef
2020-11-12 12:12 ` Li, Aubrey
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=27f88d6a-302e-2c28-c936-22ac233fe175@linux.intel.com \
--to=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=aubrey.li@intel.com \
--cc=benbjiang@gmail.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=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--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