From: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
To: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
Michael Wang <wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
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>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 7/7] sched: consider runnable load average in effective_load
Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 13:43:52 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51889498.8090409@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51877EF8.20504@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 05/06/2013 05:59 PM, Preeti U Murthy wrote:
> Suggestion1: Would change the CPU share calculation to use runnable load
> average all the time.
>
> Suggestion2: Did opposite of point 2 above,it used runnable load average
> while calculating the CPU share *before* a new task has been woken up
> while it retaining the instantaneous weight to calculate the CPU share
> after a new task could be woken up.
>
> So since there was no uniformity in the calculation of CPU shares in
> approaches 2 and 3, I think it caused a regression. However I still
> don't understand how approach 4-Suggestion2 made that go away although
> there was non-uniformity in the CPU shares calculation.
>
> But as Paul says we could retain the usage of instantaneous loads
> wherever there is calculation of CPU shares for the reason he mentioned
> and leave effective_load() and calc_cfs_shares() untouched.
>
> This also brings forth another question,should we modify wake_affine()
> to pass the runnable load average of the waking up task to effective_load().
>
> What do you think?
I am not Paul. :)
The acceptable patch of pgbench attached. In fact, since effective_load is mixed
with direct load and tg's runnable load. the patch looks no much sense.
So, I am going to agree to drop it if there is no performance benefit on my benchmarks.
---
>From f58519a8de3cebb7a865c9911c00dce5f1dd87f2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 13:29:04 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 7/7] sched: consider runnable load average in effective_load
effective_load calculates the load change as seen from the
root_task_group. It needs to engage the runnable average
of changed task.
Thanks for Morten Rasmussen and PeterZ's reminder of this.
Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
---
kernel/sched/fair.c | 22 +++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index ca0e051..b683909 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -2980,15 +2980,15 @@ static void task_waking_fair(struct task_struct *p)
#ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
/*
- * effective_load() calculates the load change as seen from the root_task_group
+ * effective_load() calculates load avg change as seen from the root_task_group
*
* Adding load to a group doesn't make a group heavier, but can cause movement
* of group shares between cpus. Assuming the shares were perfectly aligned one
* can calculate the shift in shares.
*
- * Calculate the effective load difference if @wl is added (subtracted) to @tg
- * on this @cpu and results in a total addition (subtraction) of @wg to the
- * total group weight.
+ * Calculate the effective load avg difference if @wl is added (subtracted) to
+ * @tg on this @cpu and results in a total addition (subtraction) of @wg to the
+ * total group load avg.
*
* Given a runqueue weight distribution (rw_i) we can compute a shares
* distribution (s_i) using:
@@ -3002,7 +3002,7 @@ static void task_waking_fair(struct task_struct *p)
* rw_i = { 2, 4, 1, 0 }
* s_i = { 2/7, 4/7, 1/7, 0 }
*
- * As per wake_affine() we're interested in the load of two CPUs (the CPU the
+ * As per wake_affine() we're interested in load avg of two CPUs (the CPU the
* task used to run on and the CPU the waker is running on), we need to
* compute the effect of waking a task on either CPU and, in case of a sync
* wakeup, compute the effect of the current task going to sleep.
@@ -3012,20 +3012,20 @@ static void task_waking_fair(struct task_struct *p)
*
* s'_i = (rw_i + @wl) / (@wg + \Sum rw_j) (2)
*
- * Suppose we're interested in CPUs 0 and 1, and want to compute the load
+ * Suppose we're interested in CPUs 0 and 1, and want to compute the load avg
* differences in waking a task to CPU 0. The additional task changes the
* weight and shares distributions like:
*
* rw'_i = { 3, 4, 1, 0 }
* s'_i = { 3/8, 4/8, 1/8, 0 }
*
- * We can then compute the difference in effective weight by using:
+ * We can then compute the difference in effective load avg by using:
*
* dw_i = S * (s'_i - s_i) (3)
*
* Where 'S' is the group weight as seen by its parent.
*
- * Therefore the effective change in loads on CPU 0 would be 5/56 (3/8 - 2/7)
+ * Therefore the effective change in load avg on CPU 0 would be 5/56 (3/8 - 2/7)
* times the weight of the group. The effect on CPU 1 would be -4/56 (4/8 -
* 4/7) times the weight of the group.
*/
@@ -3070,7 +3070,7 @@ 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
@@ -3116,14 +3116,14 @@ 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
--
1.7.12
--
Thanks
Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-07 5:44 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 [this message]
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=51889498.8090409@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