From: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>, Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>,
Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>,
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
"Yicong Yang" <yangyicong@hisilicon.com>,
"Gautham R . Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] sched/fair: Choose the CPU where short task is running during wake up
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2022 00:53:20 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YzcfAOLswvY05s0n@chenyu5-mobl1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtD3L4437htX__mCNBZJ+fv4MEdnNhCG2kBoQYhVESB_fg@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Vincent,
On 2022-09-29 at 10:00:40 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
[cut]
> >
> > This idea has been suggested by Rik at LPC 2019 when discussing
> > the latency nice. He asked the following question: if P1 is a small-time
> > slice task on CPU, can we put the waking task P2 on the CPU and wait for
> > P1 to release the CPU, without wasting time to search for an idle CPU?
> > At LPC 2021 Vincent Guittot has proposed:
> > 1. If the wakee is a long-running task, should we skip the short idle CPU?
> > 2. If the wakee is a short-running task, can we put it onto a lightly loaded
> > local CPU?
>
> When I said that, I had in mind to use the task utilization (util_avg
> or util_est) which reflects the recent behavior of the task but not to
> compute an average duration
>
Ah I see. However there is a scenario(will-it-scale context switch sub-test)
that, if task A is doing frequent ping-pong context switch with task B on one
CPU, we should avoid cross-CPU wakeup, by placing the wakee on the same CPU
as the waker. Since util_avg/est might be high for both waker and wakee,
we use the average duration to detect this scenario.
> >
> > Current proposal is a variant of 2:
> > If the target CPU is running a short-time slice task, and the wakee
> > is also a short-time slice task, the target CPU could be chosen as the
> > candidate when the system is busy.
> >
> > The definition of a short-time slice task is: The average running time
> > of the task during each run is no more than sysctl_sched_min_granularity.
> > If a task switches in and then voluntarily relinquishes the CPU
> > quickly, it is regarded as a short-running task. Choosing
> > sysctl_sched_min_granularity because it is the minimal slice if there
> > are too many runnable tasks.
> >
[cut]
> >
> > +/*
> > + * If a task switches in and then voluntarily relinquishes the
> > + * CPU quickly, it is regarded as a short running task.
> > + * sysctl_sched_min_granularity is chosen as the threshold,
> > + * as this value is the minimal slice if there are too many
> > + * runnable tasks, see __sched_period().
> > + */
> > +static int is_short_task(struct task_struct *p)
> > +{
> > + return (p->se.sum_exec_runtime <=
> > + (p->nvcsw * sysctl_sched_min_granularity));
>
> you assume that the task behavior will never change during is whole life time
>
I was thinking that the average running time of a task could slowly catch
up with the latest task behavior, but yes, there would be delay especially
for rapid changing tasks(and similar to rq->avg_idle). I wonder if we
could use something like:
return (p->se.avg.util_avg <=
(p->nvcsw * PELT(sysctl_sched_min_granularity));
to reflect the recent behavior of the task.
thanks,
Chenyu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-30 16:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-15 16:54 [RFC PATCH] sched/fair: Choose the CPU where short task is running during wake up Chen Yu
2022-09-15 17:10 ` Tim Chen
2022-09-16 10:49 ` Chen Yu
2022-09-16 11:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-17 13:55 ` Chen Yu
2022-09-16 11:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-17 14:15 ` Chen Yu
2022-09-26 5:50 ` K Prateek Nayak
2022-09-26 14:39 ` Gautham R. Shenoy
2022-09-29 16:58 ` K Prateek Nayak
2022-09-30 17:26 ` Chen Yu
2022-09-29 5:25 ` Chen Yu
2022-09-29 6:59 ` Honglei Wang
2022-09-29 17:34 ` K Prateek Nayak
2022-09-30 0:58 ` Honglei Wang
2022-09-30 16:03 ` Chen Yu
2022-09-29 17:19 ` K Prateek Nayak
2022-09-29 8:00 ` Vincent Guittot
2022-09-30 16:53 ` Chen Yu [this message]
2022-10-03 12:42 ` Vincent Guittot
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=YzcfAOLswvY05s0n@chenyu5-mobl1 \
--to=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
--cc=aaron.lu@intel.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tim.c.chen@intel.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=wuyun.abel@bytedance.com \
--cc=yangyicong@hisilicon.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