From: Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@linaro.org>
To: "yuyang.du@intel.com" <yuyang.du@intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>,
Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@arm.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: PELT initial task load and wake_up_new_task()
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 18:01:45 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <566B8009.2090006@linaro.org> (raw)
In init_entity_runnable_average() the last_update_time is initialized to
zero. The task is given max load and utilization as a pessimistic
initial estimate.
But if in wake_up_new_task() the task is placed on a CPU other than
where it was created, __update_load_avg() will be called via
set_task_cpu() -> migrate_task_rq_fair() -> remove_entity_load_avg().
Since last_update_time is zero the delta will be huge and the task's
load will be entirely decayed away before it is enqueued at the
destination CPU.
If last_update_time is initialized to cfs_rq_clock_task() the load will
not go away, but it will also then be subtracted from the original CPU
in remove_entity_load_avg() if the task is placed on a different CPU,
which is bad since it was never added there before.
Thinking about this more it seemed questionable to treat the assignment
of a task to a new CPU in wake_up_new_task() as a migration given that
the task has never executed previously. Would it make sense to call
__set_task_cpu() there instead of set_task_cpu()?
thanks,
Steve
next reply other threads:[~2015-12-12 2:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-12 2:01 Steve Muckle [this message]
2015-12-13 19:13 ` PELT initial task load and wake_up_new_task() Yuyang Du
2015-12-15 0:41 ` Steve Muckle
2015-12-15 2:24 ` Yuyang Du
2015-12-15 18:45 ` Steve Muckle
2015-12-15 23:55 ` Yuyang Du
2015-12-16 7:58 ` [PATCH] sched: Fix new task's load avg removed from source CPU in kbuild test robot
2015-12-17 2:50 ` PELT initial task load and wake_up_new_task() Steve Muckle
2015-12-16 23:34 ` Yuyang Du
2015-12-17 9:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-12-17 2:16 ` Yuyang Du
2016-01-06 18:49 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/fair: Fix new task' s load avg removed from source CPU in wake_up_new_task() tip-bot for Yuyang Du
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=566B8009.2090006@linaro.org \
--to=steve.muckle@linaro.org \
--cc=Juri.Lelli@arm.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=patrick.bellasi@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=yuyang.du@intel.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