From: Charles Wang <muming.wq@gmail.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Tao Ma" <tm@tao.ma>, 含黛 <handai.szj@taobao.com>,
"Doug Smythies" <dsmythies@telus.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Folding nohz load accounting more accurate
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 18:06:18 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FDEFD9A.60703@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1339781988.15222.6.camel@twins>
On Saturday, June 16, 2012 01:39 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Wednesday I ended up with something like the below.. but I haven't
> gotten round to trying Doug's latest testing method, nor did I really
> read the email I'm now replying to.
>
> I think it does something like what Wang described... every time I try
> and write comments related to why it does this I get stuck though.
>
> I ran out of time again for this week, I'll try and prod at it a little
> more next week (and try and catch up with the thread).
>
> In the meantime I thought I might as well post this.. who knows somebody
> might be bored over the weekend, it might actually work, or not :-)
>
> ---
> kernel/sched/core.c | 77 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index ca07ee0..4101a0e 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -2198,26 +2198,49 @@ calc_load(unsigned long load, unsigned long exp, unsigned long active)
> *
> * When making the ILB scale, we should try to pull this in as well.
> */
> -static atomic_long_t calc_load_tasks_idle;
> +static atomic_long_t calc_load_idle[2];
> +static int calc_load_idx;
> +
> +static inline int calc_load_write_idx(void)
> +{
> + int idx = calc_load_idx;
> +
> + /*
> + * See calc_global_nohz(), if we observe the new index, we also
> + * need to observe the new update time.
> + */
> + smp_rmb();
> +
> + if (!time_before(jiffies, calc_load_update))
> + idx++;
> +
> + return idx & 1;
> +}
> +
> +static inline int calc_load_read_idx(void)
> +{
> + return calc_load_idx & 1;
> +}
>
> void calc_load_account_idle(struct rq *this_rq)
> {
> long delta;
> + int idx;
>
> delta = calc_load_fold_active(this_rq);
> - if (delta)
> - atomic_long_add(delta, &calc_load_tasks_idle);
> + if (delta) {
> + idx = calc_load_write_idx();
> + atomic_long_add(delta, &calc_load_idle[idx]);
> + }
> }
>
> static long calc_load_fold_idle(void)
> {
> + int idx = calc_load_read_idx();
> long delta = 0;
>
> - /*
> - * Its got a race, we don't care...
> - */
> - if (atomic_long_read(&calc_load_tasks_idle))
> - delta = atomic_long_xchg(&calc_load_tasks_idle, 0);
> + if (atomic_long_read(&calc_load_idle[idx]))
> + delta = atomic_long_xchg(&calc_load_idle[idx], 0);
>
> return delta;
> }
> @@ -2313,26 +2336,32 @@ static void calc_global_nohz(void)
> if (delta)
> atomic_long_add(delta, &calc_load_tasks);
>
> - /*
> - * It could be the one fold was all it took, we done!
> - */
> - if (time_before(jiffies, calc_load_update + 10))
> - return;
> + if (!time_before(jiffies, calc_load_update + 10)) {
> + /*
> + * Catch-up, fold however many we are behind still
> + */
> + delta = jiffies - calc_load_update - 10;
> + n = 1 + (delta / LOAD_FREQ);
>
> - /*
> - * Catch-up, fold however many we are behind still
> - */
> - delta = jiffies - calc_load_update - 10;
> - n = 1 + (delta / LOAD_FREQ);
> + active = atomic_long_read(&calc_load_tasks);
> + active = active > 0 ? active * FIXED_1 : 0;
>
> - active = atomic_long_read(&calc_load_tasks);
> - active = active > 0 ? active * FIXED_1 : 0;
> + avenrun[0] = calc_load_n(avenrun[0], EXP_1, active, n);
> + avenrun[1] = calc_load_n(avenrun[1], EXP_5, active, n);
> + avenrun[2] = calc_load_n(avenrun[2], EXP_15, active, n);
>
> - avenrun[0] = calc_load_n(avenrun[0], EXP_1, active, n);
> - avenrun[1] = calc_load_n(avenrun[1], EXP_5, active, n);
> - avenrun[2] = calc_load_n(avenrun[2], EXP_15, active, n);
> + calc_load_update += n * LOAD_FREQ;
> + }
>
> - calc_load_update += n * LOAD_FREQ;
> + /*
> + * Flip the idle index...
> + *
> + * Make sure we first write the new time then flip the index, so that
> + * calc_load_write_idx() will see the new time when it reads the new
> + * index, this avoids a double flip messing things up.
> + */
> + smp_wmb();
> + calc_load_idx++;
> }
> #else
> void calc_load_account_idle(struct rq *this_rq)
>
I tried to identify the start-line precisely, and made the implemention
little more complicated. Using calc_load_update as start-line will cause
it not that accurate, but may work, and keep simple. I will test this on
my environments, and try to port the next patch on this.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-18 10:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-09 10:54 [PATCH] sched: Folding nohz load accounting more accurate Charles Wang
2012-06-11 15:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
[not found] ` <4FD6BFC4.1060302@gmail.com>
2012-06-12 8:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-12 9:34 ` Charles Wang
2012-06-12 9:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-13 5:55 ` Doug Smythies
2012-06-13 7:56 ` Charles Wang
2012-06-14 4:41 ` Doug Smythies
2012-06-14 15:42 ` Charles Wang
2012-06-16 6:42 ` Doug Smythies
2012-06-13 8:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-13 15:33 ` Doug Smythies
2012-06-13 21:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-14 3:13 ` Doug Smythies
2012-06-18 10:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-07-20 19:24 ` sched: care and feeding of load-avg code (Re: [PATCH] sched: Folding nohz load accounting more accurate) Jonathan Nieder
2012-06-15 14:27 ` [PATCH] sched: Folding nohz load accounting more accurate Charles Wang
2012-06-15 17:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-16 14:53 ` Doug Smythies
2012-06-18 6:41 ` Doug Smythies
2012-06-18 14:41 ` Charles Wang
2012-06-18 10:06 ` Charles Wang [this message]
2012-06-18 16:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-19 6:08 ` Yong Zhang
2012-06-19 9:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-19 15:50 ` Doug Smythies
2012-06-20 9:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-21 4:12 ` Doug Smythies
2012-06-21 6:35 ` Charles Wang
2012-06-21 8:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-22 14:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-24 21:45 ` Doug Smythies
2012-07-03 16:01 ` Doug Smythies
2012-06-25 2:15 ` Charles Wang
2012-07-06 6:19 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- again tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-19 6:19 ` [PATCH] sched: Folding nohz load accounting more accurate Doug Smythies
2012-06-19 6:24 ` Charles Wang
2012-06-19 9:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=4FDEFD9A.60703@gmail.com \
--to=muming.wq@gmail.com \
--cc=dsmythies@telus.net \
--cc=handai.szj@taobao.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tm@tao.ma \
/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