public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>
Cc: "peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"mingo@kernel.org" <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
	"riel@redhat.com" <riel@redhat.com>,
	"vincent.guittot@linaro.org" <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	"srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"pjt@google.com" <pjt@google.com>,
	"benh@kernel.crashing.org" <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	"efault@gmx.de" <efault@gmx.de>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com" <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
	"svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com" <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: sched: Improve load balancing in the presence of idle CPUs
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 14:12:08 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <551D00E0.2010204@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1427954347.2556.43.camel@j-VirtualBox>

On 04/02/2015 11:29 AM, Jason Low wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-04-01 at 18:04 +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 07:49:56AM +0100, Preeti U Murthy wrote:
> 
>>> I am sorry I don't quite get this. Can you please elaborate?
>>
>> I think the scenario is that we are in nohz_idle_balance() and decide to
>> bail out because we have pulled some tasks, but before leaving
>> nohz_idle_balance() we want to check if more balancing is necessary
>> using nohz_kick_needed() and potentially kick somebody to continue.
> 
> Also, below is an example patch.
> 
> (Without the conversion to idle_cpu(), the check for rq->idle_balance
> would not be accurate anymore)
> 
> ---
>  kernel/sched/fair.c |   17 ++++++++++-------
>  1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index fdae26e..7749a14 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -7620,6 +7620,8 @@ out:
>  }
> 
>  #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON
> +static inline bool nohz_kick_needed(struct rq *rq);
> +
>  /*
>   * In CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON case, the idle balance kickee will do the
>   * rebalancing for all the cpus for whom scheduler ticks are stopped.
> @@ -7629,6 +7631,7 @@ static void nohz_idle_balance(struct rq *this_rq, enum cpu_idle_type idle)
>  	int this_cpu = this_rq->cpu;
>  	struct rq *rq;
>  	int balance_cpu;
> +	bool done_balancing = false;
> 
>  	if (idle != CPU_IDLE ||
>  	    !test_bit(NOHZ_BALANCE_KICK, nohz_flags(this_cpu)))
> @@ -7644,7 +7647,7 @@ static void nohz_idle_balance(struct rq *this_rq, enum cpu_idle_type idle)
>  		 * balancing owner will pick it up.
>  		 */
>  		if (need_resched())
> -			break;
> +			goto end;
> 
>  		rq = cpu_rq(balance_cpu);
> 
> @@ -7663,9 +7666,12 @@ static void nohz_idle_balance(struct rq *this_rq, enum cpu_idle_type idle)
>  		if (time_after(this_rq->next_balance, rq->next_balance))
>  			this_rq->next_balance = rq->next_balance;
>  	}
> +	done_balancing = true;
>  	nohz.next_balance = this_rq->next_balance;
>  end:
>  	clear_bit(NOHZ_BALANCE_KICK, nohz_flags(this_cpu));
> +	if (!done_balancing && nohz_kick_needed(this_rq))
> +		nohz_balancer_kick();
>  }
> 
>  /*
> @@ -7687,7 +7693,7 @@ static inline bool nohz_kick_needed(struct rq *rq)
>  	int nr_busy, cpu = rq->cpu;
>  	bool kick = false;
> 
> -	if (unlikely(rq->idle_balance))
> +	if (unlikely(idle_cpu(cpu)))
>  		return false;
> 
>         /*
> @@ -7757,16 +7763,13 @@ static void run_rebalance_domains(struct softirq_action *h)
>  	enum cpu_idle_type idle = this_rq->idle_balance ?
>  						CPU_IDLE : CPU_NOT_IDLE;
> 
> +	rebalance_domains(this_rq, idle);
>  	/*
>  	 * If this cpu has a pending nohz_balance_kick, then do the
>  	 * balancing on behalf of the other idle cpus whose ticks are
> -	 * stopped. Do nohz_idle_balance *before* rebalance_domains to
> -	 * give the idle cpus a chance to load balance. Else we may
> -	 * load balance only within the local sched_domain hierarchy
> -	 * and abort nohz_idle_balance altogether if we pull some load.
> +	 * stopped.
>  	 */
>  	nohz_idle_balance(this_rq, idle);
> -	rebalance_domains(this_rq, idle);
>  }

Ok this patch looks good. Let me test to find out if scheduling behavior
improves.

Regards
Preeti U Murthy


> 
>  /*
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2015-04-02  8:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-30 18:55 sched: Improve load balancing in the presence of idle CPUs Jason Low
2015-03-31  8:37 ` Preeti U Murthy
2015-03-31 18:54   ` Jason Low
2015-04-01  6:49     ` Preeti U Murthy
2015-04-01 17:04       ` Morten Rasmussen
2015-04-02  3:30         ` Jason Low
2015-04-02  8:49           ` Morten Rasmussen
2015-04-02  5:59         ` Jason Low
2015-04-02  8:42           ` Preeti U Murthy [this message]
2015-04-02  9:17           ` Morten Rasmussen
2015-04-02 17:22             ` Jason Low
2015-04-03 22:35           ` Tim Chen
2015-04-07 17:42             ` Jason Low
2015-04-07 19:39               ` Tim Chen
2015-04-07 20:24                 ` Jason Low
2015-04-04  9:59           ` Preeti U Murthy
2015-04-07 23:28             ` Jason Low
2015-04-08  0:07               ` Jason Low
2015-04-08 11:12                 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2015-04-08 21:22                   ` Jason Low
2015-04-10  8:37                     ` Srikar Dronamraju
2015-04-13 18:55                       ` Jason Low
2015-04-13 20:54                       ` Jason Low
2015-04-09  2:39                   ` Jason Low
2015-04-09  7:02                     ` Srikar Dronamraju
2015-04-09 22:49                       ` Jason Low
2015-04-13  6:16                 ` Preeti U Murthy
2015-04-13 22:49                   ` Jason Low
2015-04-14  2:59                     ` Jason Low
2015-04-02  2:11   ` Jason Low

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=551D00E0.2010204@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --cc=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
    --cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pjt@google.com \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    /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