From: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
To: Vitalii Bursov <vitaly@bursov.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] docs: cgroup-v1: clarify that domain levels are system-specific
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2024 19:00:11 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <540e7569-de5f-4167-a0f3-e508c7bdd63c@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <78c60269-5aee-45d7-8014-2c0188f972da@bursov.com>
On 4/1/24 4:05 PM, Vitalii Bursov wrote:
>
>
> On 01.04.24 07:05, Shrikanth Hegde wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 3/31/24 9:31 PM, Vitalii Bursov wrote:
>>> Add a clarification that domain levels are system-specific
>>> and where to check for system details.
>>>
>>> Add CPU clusters to the scheduler domain levels table.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Vitalii Bursov <vitaly@bursov.com>
>>> ---
>>> Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v1/cpusets.rst | 16 +++++++++++-----
>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v1/cpusets.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v1/cpusets.rst
>>> index 7d3415eea..d16a3967d 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v1/cpusets.rst
>>> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v1/cpusets.rst
>>> @@ -568,19 +568,25 @@ on the next tick. For some applications in special situation, waiting
>>>
>>> The 'cpuset.sched_relax_domain_level' file allows you to request changing
>>> this searching range as you like. This file takes int value which
>>> -indicates size of searching range in levels ideally as follows,
>>> +indicates size of searching range in levels approximately as follows,
>>> otherwise initial value -1 that indicates the cpuset has no request.
>>>
>>> ====== ===========================================================
>>> -1 no request. use system default or follow request of others.
>>> 0 no search.
>>> 1 search siblings (hyperthreads in a core).
>>> - 2 search cores in a package.
>>> - 3 search cpus in a node [= system wide on non-NUMA system]
>>> - 4 search nodes in a chunk of node [on NUMA system]
>>> - 5 search system wide [on NUMA system]
>>> + 2 search cpu clusters
>>> + 3 search cores in a package.
>>> + 4 search cpus in a node [= system wide on non-NUMA system]
>>> + 5 search nodes in a chunk of node [on NUMA system]
>>> + 6 search system wide [on NUMA system]
>>
>> I think above block of documentation need not change. SD_CLUSTER is a software
>> construct, not a sched domain per se.
>>
>
> I added "cpu clusters" because the original table:
> ====== ===========================================================
> -1 no request. use system default or follow request of others.
> 0 no search.
> 1 search siblings (hyperthreads in a core).
> 2 search cores in a package.
> 3 search cpus in a node [= system wide on non-NUMA system]
> 4 search nodes in a chunk of node [on NUMA system]
> 5 search system wide [on NUMA system]
> ====== ===========================================================
> does not match to what I see on a few systems I checked.
>
> AMD Ryzen and the same dual-CPU Intel server with NUMA disabled:
> level:0 - SMT
> level:2 - MC
> level:3 - PKG
>
> Server with NUMA enabled:
> level:0 - SMT
> level:2 - MC
> level:5 - NUMA
>
None of these are "cpu clusters".
From what i know, the description for the above are.
SMT - multi-threads/hyperthreads
MC - Multi-Core
PKG - Package/Socket level
NUMA - Node level. When you enable, PKG gets degenerated since pkg mask and numa mask would
have been same.
> So, for the relax level original table:
> 1 -> enables 0 SMP -> OK
> 2 -> enables 1 unknown -> does not enable cores in a package
> 3 -> enables 2 MC -> OK for NUMA, but not system wide on non-NUMA system
> 5 -> enables 4 unknown -> does not enable system wide on NUMA
>
> The updated table
> ====== ===========================================================
> -1 no request. use system default or follow request of others.
> 0 no search.
> 1 search siblings (hyperthreads in a core).
> 2 search cpu clusters
> 3 search cores in a package.
> 4 search cpus in a node [= system wide on non-NUMA system]
> 5 search nodes in a chunk of node [on NUMA system]
> 6 search system wide [on NUMA system]
> ====== ===========================================================
> would work like this:
> 1 -> enables 0 SMP -> OK
> 2 -> enables 1 unknown -> does nothing new
> 3 -> enables 2 MC -> OK, cores in a package for NUMA and non-NUMA system
> 4 -> enables 3 PKG -> OK on non-NUMA system
It wont, PKG domain itself wont be there. It gets removed.
> 6 -> enables 5 NUMA -> OK
>
> I think it would look more correct on "average" systems, but anyway,
> please confirm and I'll remove the table update in an updated patch.
>
IMHO, the table need not get updated. Just adding a paragraph pointing
to refer to the sysfs files is good enough.
> Thanks
>
>> IMO the next paragraph that is added is good enough and the above change can be removed.
>
>>> ====== ===========================================================
>>>
>>> +Not all levels can be present and values can change depending on the
>>> +system architecture and kernel configuration. Check
>>> +/sys/kernel/debug/sched/domains/cpu*/domain*/ for system-specific
>>> +details.
>>> +
>>> The system default is architecture dependent. The system default
>>> can be changed using the relax_domain_level= boot parameter.
>>>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-01 13:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-31 16:01 [PATCH v2 0/3] sched/fair: allow disabling sched_balance_newidle with sched_relax_domain_level Vitalii Bursov
2024-03-31 16:01 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] " Vitalii Bursov
2024-04-01 10:23 ` Vincent Guittot
2024-03-31 16:01 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] sched/debug: dump domains' level Vitalii Bursov
2024-03-31 16:01 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] docs: cgroup-v1: clarify that domain levels are system-specific Vitalii Bursov
2024-04-01 4:05 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2024-04-01 10:35 ` Vitalii Bursov
2024-04-01 13:30 ` Shrikanth Hegde [this message]
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=540e7569-de5f-4167-a0f3-e508c7bdd63c@linux.ibm.com \
--to=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.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=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vitaly@bursov.com \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.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