From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: vincent.donnefort@arm.com
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, patrick.bellasi@matbug.net,
valentin.schneider@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Fix task utilization accountability in cpu_util_next()
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 10:11:03 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YDODN1rnTqfTQOug@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210222095401.37158-1-vincent.donnefort@arm.com>
Hey Vincent,
On Monday 22 Feb 2021 at 09:54:01 (+0000), vincent.donnefort@arm.com wrote:
> From: Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>
>
> Currently, cpu_util_next() estimates the CPU utilization as follows:
>
> max(cpu_util + task_util,
> cpu_util_est + task_util_est)
s/task_util_est/_task_util_est
This is an important difference.
>
> This is an issue when making a comparison between CPUs, as the task
> contribution can be either:
>
> (1) task_util_est, on a mostly idle CPU, where cpu_util is close to 0
> and task_util_est > cpu_util.
> (2) task_util, on a mostly busy CPU, where cpu_util > task_util_est.
I don't understand how this is an issue, this is by design with util-est
no?
Note that cpu_util_next() tries to accurately predict what cpu_util(@cpu)
will be once @p is enqueued on @dst_cpu. There should be no policy
decision here, we just reproduce the enqueue aggreagation -- see
util_est_enqueue() and cpu_util().
Could you please give an example where you think cpu_util_next()
computes the wrong value?
Thanks,
Quentin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-22 10:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-22 9:54 [PATCH] sched/fair: Fix task utilization accountability in cpu_util_next() vincent.donnefort
2021-02-22 10:11 ` Quentin Perret [this message]
2021-02-22 11:36 ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-02-22 12:23 ` Quentin Perret
2021-02-22 15:01 ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-02-22 15:58 ` Quentin Perret
2021-02-22 16:23 ` Quentin Perret
2021-02-22 16:39 ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-02-22 16:43 ` Quentin Perret
2021-02-23 14:47 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2021-02-22 16:31 ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-02-22 16:35 ` Quentin Perret
2021-02-23 14:44 ` Dietmar Eggemann
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=YDODN1rnTqfTQOug@google.com \
--to=qperret@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=patrick.bellasi@matbug.net \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.donnefort@arm.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