From: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
To: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Preeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Michael Wang <wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] sched: compute runnable load avg in cpu_load and cpu_avg_load_per_task
Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 13:12:02 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51888D22.8010309@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPM31RJBiGtLPbBwuWJQvW6e=5x=X7+Qx5YKJkjtyr_HDEqivg@mail.gmail.com>
On 05/07/2013 02:34 AM, Paul Turner wrote:
>> > Current load balance doesn't consider slept task's load which is
>> > represented by blocked_load_avg. And the slept task is not on_rq, so
>> > consider it in load balance is a little strange.
> The load-balancer has a longer time horizon; think of blocked_loag_avg
> to be a signal for the load, already assigned to this cpu, which is
> expected to appear (within roughly the next quantum).
>
> Consider the following scenario:
>
> tasks: A,B (40% busy), C (90% busy)
>
> Suppose we have:
> CPU 0: CPU 1:
> A C
> B
>
> Then, when C blocks the load balancer ticks.
>
> If we considered only runnable_load then A or B would be eligible for
> migration to CPU 1, which is essentially where we are today.
>
here is the changed patch according to Paul's comments. Is that you liked, Paul? :)
---
>From 1d7290530e2ee402874bbce39297bb1cfd882339 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 13:56:11 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 5/7] sched: compute runnable load avg in cpu_load and
cpu_avg_load_per_task
They are the base values in load balance, update them with rq runnable
load average, then the load balance will consider runnable load avg
naturally.
Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
---
kernel/sched/core.c | 16 ++++++++++++++--
kernel/sched/fair.c | 8 ++++++--
2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 33d9a858..f4c6cac 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -2536,9 +2536,14 @@ static void __update_cpu_load(struct rq *this_rq, unsigned long this_load,
void update_idle_cpu_load(struct rq *this_rq)
{
unsigned long curr_jiffies = ACCESS_ONCE(jiffies);
- unsigned long load = this_rq->load.weight;
+ unsigned long load;
unsigned long pending_updates;
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+ load = this_rq->cfs.runnable_load_avg + this_rq->cfs.blocked_load_avg;
+#else
+ load = this_rq->load.weight;
+#endif
/*
* bail if there's load or we're actually up-to-date.
*/
@@ -2582,11 +2587,18 @@ void update_cpu_load_nohz(void)
*/
static void update_cpu_load_active(struct rq *this_rq)
{
+ unsigned long load;
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+ load = this_rq->cfs.runnable_load_avg + this_rq->cfs.blocked_load_avg;
+#else
+ load = this_rq->load.weight;
+#endif
/*
* See the mess around update_idle_cpu_load() / update_cpu_load_nohz().
*/
this_rq->last_load_update_tick = jiffies;
- __update_cpu_load(this_rq, this_rq->load.weight, 1);
+ __update_cpu_load(this_rq, load, 1);
calc_load_account_active(this_rq);
}
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 2881d42..407ef61 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -2900,7 +2900,8 @@ static void dequeue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
/* Used instead of source_load when we know the type == 0 */
static unsigned long weighted_cpuload(const int cpu)
{
- return cpu_rq(cpu)->load.weight;
+ struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
+ return rq->cfs.runnable_load_avg + rq->cfs.blocked_load_avg;
}
/*
@@ -2946,8 +2947,11 @@ static unsigned long cpu_avg_load_per_task(int cpu)
struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
unsigned long nr_running = ACCESS_ONCE(rq->nr_running);
+ unsigned long load_avg;
+ load_avg = rq->cfs.runnable_load_avg + rq->cfs.blocked_load_avg;
+
if (nr_running)
- return rq->load.weight / nr_running;
+ return load_avg / nr_running;
return 0;
}
--
1.7.12
--
Thanks
Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-07 5:12 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 [this message]
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
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=51888D22.8010309@intel.com \
--to=alex.shi@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--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=preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.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