From: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Michael Wang <wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>,
mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, bp@alien8.de, pjt@google.com,
namhyung@kernel.org, efault@gmx.de, morten.rasmussen@arm.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, viresh.kumar@linaro.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mgorman@suse.de, riel@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 7/7] sched: consider runnable load average in effective_load
Date: Mon, 06 May 2013 12:40:07 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5187574F.9020009@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <518724D1.9040006@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Hi Alex,Michael,
Can you try out the below patch and check? I have the reason mentioned in the changelog.
If this also causes performance regression,you probably need to remove changes made in
effective_load() as Michael points out. I believe the below patch should not cause
performance regression.
The below patch is a substitute for patch 7.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sched: Modify effective_load() to use runnable load average
From: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
The runqueue weight distribution should update the runnable load average of
the cfs_rq on which the task will be woken up.
However since the computation of se->load.weight takes into consideration
the runnable load average in update_cfs_shares(),no need to modify this in
effective_load().
---
kernel/sched/fair.c | 9 ++++++---
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 790e23d..5489022 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -3045,7 +3045,7 @@ static long effective_load(struct task_group *tg, int cpu, long wl, long wg)
/*
* w = rw_i + @wl
*/
- w = se->my_q->load.weight + wl;
+ w = se->my_q->runnable_load_avg + wl;
/*
* wl = S * s'_i; see (2)
@@ -3066,6 +3066,9 @@ static long effective_load(struct task_group *tg, int cpu, long wl, long wg)
/*
* wl = dw_i = S * (s'_i - s_i); see (3)
*/
+ /* Do not modify the below as it already contains runnable
+ * load average in its computation
+ */
wl -= se->load.weight;
/*
@@ -3112,14 +3115,14 @@ static int wake_affine(struct sched_domain *sd, struct task_struct *p, int sync)
*/
if (sync) {
tg = task_group(current);
- weight = current->se.load.weight;
+ weight = current->se.avg.load_avg_contrib;
this_load += effective_load(tg, this_cpu, -weight, -weight);
load += effective_load(tg, prev_cpu, 0, -weight);
}
tg = task_group(p);
- weight = p->se.load.weight;
+ weight = p->se.avg.load_avg_contrib;
/*
* In low-load situations, where prev_cpu is idle and this_cpu is idle
Regards
Preeti U Murthy
On 05/06/2013 09:04 AM, Michael Wang wrote:
> Hi, Alex
>
> On 05/06/2013 09:45 AM, Alex Shi wrote:
>> effective_load calculates the load change as seen from the
>> root_task_group. It needs to engage the runnable average
>> of changed task.
> [snip]
>> */
>> @@ -3045,7 +3045,7 @@ static long effective_load(struct task_group *tg, int cpu, long wl, long wg)
>> /*
>> * w = rw_i + @wl
>> */
>> - w = se->my_q->load.weight + wl;
>> + w = se->my_q->tg_load_contrib + wl;
>
> I've tested the patch set, seems like the last patch caused big
> regression on pgbench:
>
> base patch 1~6 patch 1~7
> | db_size | clients | tps | | tps | | tps |
> +---------+---------+-------+ +-------+ +-------+
> | 22 MB | 32 | 43420 | | 53387 | | 41625 |
>
> I guess some magic thing happened in effective_load() while calculating
> group decay combined with load decay, what's your opinion?
>
> Regards,
> Michael Wang
>
>>
>> /*
>> * wl = S * s'_i; see (2)
>> @@ -3066,7 +3066,7 @@ static long effective_load(struct task_group *tg, int cpu, long wl, long wg)
>> /*
>> * wl = dw_i = S * (s'_i - s_i); see (3)
>> */
>> - wl -= se->load.weight;
>> + wl -= se->avg.load_avg_contrib;
>>
>> /*
>> * Recursively apply this logic to all parent groups to compute
>> @@ -3112,14 +3112,14 @@ static int wake_affine(struct sched_domain *sd, struct task_struct *p, int sync)
>> */
>> if (sync) {
>> tg = task_group(current);
>> - weight = current->se.load.weight;
>> + weight = current->se.avg.load_avg_contrib;
>>
>> this_load += effective_load(tg, this_cpu, -weight, -weight);
>> load += effective_load(tg, prev_cpu, 0, -weight);
>> }
>>
>> tg = task_group(p);
>> - weight = p->se.load.weight;
>> + weight = p->se.avg.load_avg_contrib;
>>
>> /*
>> * In low-load situations, where prev_cpu is idle and this_cpu is idle
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-06 10:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 87+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-06 1:45 [PATCH v5 0/7] use runnable load avg in load balance Alex Shi
2013-05-06 1:45 ` [PATCH v5 1/7] Revert "sched: Introduce temporary FAIR_GROUP_SCHED dependency for load-tracking" Alex Shi
2013-05-06 8:24 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-06 8:49 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 8:55 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-06 8:58 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-07 5:05 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 1:45 ` [PATCH v5 2/7] sched: remove SMP cover for runnable variables in cfs_rq Alex Shi
2013-05-06 4:11 ` Preeti U Murthy
2013-05-06 7:18 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 8:01 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-06 8:57 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 9:08 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-06 10:47 ` Preeti U Murthy
2013-05-06 15:02 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-07 5:07 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 1:45 ` [PATCH v5 3/7] sched: set initial value of runnable avg for new forked task Alex Shi
2013-05-06 8:19 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-06 9:21 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 10:17 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-07 2:18 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-07 3:06 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-07 3:24 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-07 5:03 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-09 8:31 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-09 9:30 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-09 14:23 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-08 11:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-09 9:34 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-07 9:57 ` Morten Rasmussen
2013-05-07 11:05 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-07 11:20 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-08 11:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-08 12:00 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-09 10:55 ` Morten Rasmussen
2013-05-09 8:22 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-09 9:24 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-09 13:13 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 10:22 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-06 15:26 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 15:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-07 2:19 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 1:45 ` [PATCH v5 4/7] sched: update cpu load after task_tick Alex Shi
2013-05-06 1:45 ` [PATCH v5 5/7] sched: compute runnable load avg in cpu_load and cpu_avg_load_per_task Alex Shi
2013-05-06 8:46 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-06 10:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-06 10:33 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-06 11:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-07 6:17 ` Alex Shi
2013-06-04 1:45 ` Alex Shi
2013-06-04 1:51 ` [DISCUSSION] removing variety rq->cpu_load ? Alex Shi
2013-06-04 2:33 ` Michael Wang
2013-06-04 2:44 ` Alex Shi
2013-06-04 3:09 ` Michael Wang
2013-06-04 4:55 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 15:00 ` [PATCH v5 5/7] sched: compute runnable load avg in cpu_load and cpu_avg_load_per_task Alex Shi
2013-05-06 18:34 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-07 0:24 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-07 5:12 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 1:45 ` [PATCH v5 6/7] sched: consider runnable load average in move_tasks Alex Shi
2013-05-06 8:53 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-06 15:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-06 20:59 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-07 5:17 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-08 1:39 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-09 1:24 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-10 13:58 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-09 5:29 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-10 14:03 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 15:07 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 1:45 ` [PATCH v5 7/7] sched: consider runnable load average in effective_load Alex Shi
2013-05-06 3:34 ` Michael Wang
2013-05-06 5:39 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 6:11 ` Michael Wang
2013-05-06 9:39 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 7:49 ` Michael Wang
2013-05-06 8:02 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 8:34 ` Michael Wang
2013-05-06 9:06 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-06 9:35 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 9:59 ` Preeti U Murthy
2013-05-07 2:43 ` Michael Wang
2013-05-07 5:43 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-08 1:33 ` Alex Shi
2013-05-06 10:00 ` Paul Turner
2013-05-06 7:10 ` Preeti U Murthy [this message]
2013-05-06 7:20 ` Michael Wang
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=5187574F.9020009@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alex.shi@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.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