linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
To: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>, Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Libo Chen <libo.chen@oracle.com>,
	Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>,
	Madadi Vineeth Reddy <vineethr@linux.ibm.com>,
	Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>, Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
	"Gautham R . Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC patch v3 14/20] sched: Introduce update_llc_busiest() to deal with groups having preferred LLC tasks
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2025 01:22:09 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <736d41f0-1eb4-4420-ab67-e88fc7e31bda@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e5b77a2e33a6a98de0468c999e8c94d226b8e6d3.1750268218.git.tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>



On 6/18/25 23:58, Tim Chen wrote:
> The load balancer attempts to identify the busiest sched_group with
> the highest load and migrates some tasks to a less busy sched_group
> to distribute the load across different CPUs.
> 
> When cache-aware scheduling is enabled, the busiest sched_group is
> defined as the one with the highest number of tasks preferring to run
> on the destination LLC. If the busiest group has llc_balance tag,
> the cache aware load balance will be launched.
> 
> Introduce the helper function update_llc_busiest() to identify
> such sched group with most tasks preferring the destination LLC.
> 
> Co-developed-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>   kernel/sched/fair.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>   1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 48a090c6e885..ab3d1239d6e4 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -10848,12 +10848,36 @@ static inline bool llc_balance(struct lb_env *env, struct sg_lb_stats *sgs,
>   
>   	return false;
>   }
> +
> +static bool update_llc_busiest(struct lb_env *env,
> +			       struct sg_lb_stats *busiest,
> +			       struct sg_lb_stats *sgs)
> +{
> +	int idx;
> +
> +	/* Only the candidate with llc_balance need to be taken care of */
> +	if (!sgs->group_llc_balance)
> +		return false;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * There are more tasks that want to run on dst_cpu's LLC.
> +	 */
> +	idx = llc_idx(env->dst_cpu);
> +	return sgs->nr_pref_llc[idx] > busiest->nr_pref_llc[idx];
> +}
>   #else
>   static inline bool llc_balance(struct lb_env *env, struct sg_lb_stats *sgs,
>   			       struct sched_group *group)
>   {
>   	return false;
>   }
> +
> +static bool update_llc_busiest(struct lb_env *env,
> +			       struct sg_lb_stats *busiest,
> +			       struct sg_lb_stats *sgs)
> +{
> +	return false;
> +}
>   #endif
>   
>   static inline long sibling_imbalance(struct lb_env *env,
> @@ -11085,6 +11109,14 @@ static bool update_sd_pick_busiest(struct lb_env *env,
>   	     sds->local_stat.group_type != group_has_spare))
>   		return false;
>   
> +	/* deal with prefer LLC load balance, if failed, fall into normal load balance */
> +	if (update_llc_busiest(env, busiest, sgs))
> +		return true;
> +
> +	/* if there is already a busy group, skip the normal load balance */
> +	if (busiest->group_llc_balance)
> +		return false;
> +

If you had a group which was group_overloaded but it could have group_llc_balance right?
In this case the priorities based on group_type is not followed no?

>   	if (sgs->group_type > busiest->group_type)
>   		return true;
>   
> @@ -11991,9 +12023,11 @@ static struct sched_group *sched_balance_find_src_group(struct lb_env *env)
>   	/*
>   	 * Try to move all excess tasks to a sibling domain of the busiest
>   	 * group's child domain.
> +	 * Also do so if we can move some tasks that prefer the local LLC.
>   	 */
>   	if (sds.prefer_sibling && local->group_type == group_has_spare &&
> -	    sibling_imbalance(env, &sds, busiest, local) > 1)
> +	    (busiest->group_llc_balance ||
> +	    sibling_imbalance(env, &sds, busiest, local) > 1))
>   		goto force_balance;
>   
>   	if (busiest->group_type != group_overloaded) {

Also, This load balancing happening due to llc could be very tricky to debug.
Any stats added to schedstat or sched/debug?

  reply	other threads:[~2025-07-03 19:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-18 18:27 [RFC patch v3 00/20] Cache aware scheduling Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 01/20] sched: Cache aware load-balancing Tim Chen
2025-06-26 12:23   ` Jianyong Wu
2025-06-26 13:32     ` Chen, Yu C
2025-06-27  0:10       ` Tim Chen
2025-06-27  2:13         ` Jianyong Wu
2025-07-03 19:29   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-04  8:40     ` Chen, Yu C
2025-07-04  8:45       ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-07-04  8:54         ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-07 19:57     ` Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 02/20] sched: Several fixes for cache aware scheduling Tim Chen
2025-07-03 19:33   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-07 21:02     ` Tim Chen
2025-07-08  1:15   ` Libo Chen
2025-07-08  7:54     ` Chen, Yu C
2025-07-08 15:47       ` Libo Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 03/20] sched: Avoid task migration within its preferred LLC Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 04/20] sched: Avoid calculating the cpumask if the system is overloaded Tim Chen
2025-07-03 19:39   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-07 14:57     ` Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 05/20] sched: Add hysteresis to switch a task's preferred LLC Tim Chen
2025-07-02  6:47   ` Madadi Vineeth Reddy
2025-07-02 21:47     ` Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 06/20] sched: Save the per LLC utilization for better cache aware scheduling Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 07/20] sched: Add helper function to decide whether to allow " Tim Chen
2025-07-08  0:41   ` Libo Chen
2025-07-08  8:29     ` Chen, Yu C
2025-07-08 17:22       ` Libo Chen
2025-07-09 14:41         ` Chen, Yu C
2025-07-09 21:31           ` Libo Chen
2025-07-08 21:59     ` Tim Chen
2025-07-09 21:22       ` Libo Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 08/20] sched: Set up LLC indexing Tim Chen
2025-07-03 19:44   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-04  9:36     ` Chen, Yu C
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 09/20] sched: Introduce task preferred LLC field Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 10/20] sched: Calculate the number of tasks that have LLC preference on a runqueue Tim Chen
2025-07-03 19:45   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-04 15:00     ` Chen, Yu C
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 11/20] sched: Introduce per runqueue task LLC preference counter Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 12/20] sched: Calculate the total number of preferred LLC tasks during load balance Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 13/20] sched: Tag the sched group as llc_balance if it has tasks prefer other LLC Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 14/20] sched: Introduce update_llc_busiest() to deal with groups having preferred LLC tasks Tim Chen
2025-07-03 19:52   ` Shrikanth Hegde [this message]
2025-07-05  2:26     ` Chen, Yu C
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 15/20] sched: Introduce a new migration_type to track the preferred LLC load balance Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 16/20] sched: Consider LLC locality for active balance Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 17/20] sched: Consider LLC preference when picking tasks from busiest queue Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 18/20] sched: Do not migrate task if it is moving out of its preferred LLC Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 19/20] sched: Introduce SCHED_CACHE_LB to control cache aware load balance Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 20/20] sched: Introduce SCHED_CACHE_WAKE to control LLC aggregation on wake up Tim Chen
2025-06-19  6:39 ` [RFC patch v3 00/20] Cache aware scheduling Yangyu Chen
2025-06-19 13:21   ` Chen, Yu C
2025-06-19 14:12     ` Yangyu Chen
2025-06-20 19:25 ` Madadi Vineeth Reddy
2025-06-22  0:39   ` Chen, Yu C
2025-06-24 17:47     ` Madadi Vineeth Reddy
2025-06-23 16:45   ` Tim Chen
2025-06-24  5:00 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-06-24 12:16   ` Chen, Yu C
2025-06-25  4:19     ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-06-25  0:30   ` Tim Chen
2025-06-25  4:30     ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-07-03 20:00   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-04 10:09     ` Chen, Yu C
2025-07-09 19:39 ` Madadi Vineeth Reddy
2025-07-10  3:33   ` Chen, Yu C

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=736d41f0-1eb4-4420-ab67-e88fc7e31bda@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
    --cc=hdanton@sina.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --cc=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=libo.chen@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vineethr@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
    --cc=wuyun.abel@bytedance.com \
    --cc=yu.c.chen@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).