From: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: <mingo@kernel.org>, <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
<dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>, <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
<bsegall@google.com>, <mgorman@suse.de>, <bristot@redhat.com>,
<corbet@lwn.net>, <qyousef@layalina.io>, <chris.hyser@oracle.com>,
<patrick.bellasi@matbug.net>, <pjt@google.com>, <pavel@ucw.cz>,
<qperret@google.com>, <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
<joshdon@google.com>, <timj@gnu.org>, <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
<youssefesmat@chromium.org>, <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] sched/fair: Add avg_vruntime
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2023 21:58:13 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZBm39VNJCwioq+V4@chenyu5-mobl1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230306141502.569748782@infradead.org>
On 2023-03-06 at 14:25:27 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[...]
>
> +/*
> + * Compute virtual time from the per-task service numbers:
> + *
> + * Fair schedulers conserve lag: \Sum lag_i = 0
> + *
> + * lag_i = S - s_i = w_i * (V - v_i)
> + *
The definination of above lag_i seems to be inconsistent with the defininatin
of se->lag in PATCH 8. Maybe rename lag_i to something other to avoid confusion?
> + * \Sum lag_i = 0 -> \Sum w_i * (V - v_i) = V * \Sum w_i - \Sum w_i * v_i = 0
> + *
> + * From which we solve V:
> + *
> + * \Sum v_i * w_i
> + * V = --------------
> + * \Sum w_i
> + *
> + * However, since v_i is u64, and the multiplcation could easily overflow
> + * transform it into a relative form that uses smaller quantities:
> + *
> + * Substitute: v_i == (v_i - v) + v
> + *
> + * \Sum ((v_i - v) + v) * w_i \Sum (v_i - v) * w_i
> + * V = -------------------------- = -------------------- + v
> + * \Sum w_i \Sum w_i
> + *
> + *
Not sure if I understand it correctly, does it mean (v_i - v) * w_i will not
overflow? If the weight of task is 15 (nice 19), then if v_i - v > (S64_MAX / 15)
it gets overflow. Is it possible that v_i is much larger than cfs_rq->min_vruntime
in this case?
thanks,
Chenyu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-21 13:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-06 13:25 [PATCH 00/10] sched: EEVDF using latency-nice Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 01/10] sched: Introduce latency-nice as a per-task attribute Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 02/10] sched/core: Propagate parent tasks latency requirements to the child task Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 03/10] sched: Allow sched_{get,set}attr to change latency_nice of the task Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 04/10] sched/fair: Add latency_offset Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 05/10] sched/fair: Add sched group latency support Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 06/10] sched/fair: Add avg_vruntime Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-21 13:58 ` Chen Yu [this message]
2023-03-21 16:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-24 7:12 ` Chen Yu
2023-03-24 10:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 07/10] sched/fair: Remove START_DEBIT Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 08/10] sched/fair: Add lag based placement Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-16 22:49 ` Tim Chen
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 09/10] rbtree: Add rb_add_augmented_cached() helper Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 10/10] sched/fair: Implement an EEVDF like policy Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-08 8:39 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-03-08 9:26 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-03-08 13:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-03-09 4:23 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-03-10 20:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-11 5:53 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-03-11 7:56 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-03-09 9:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-09 12:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-09 15:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-09 15:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-09 16:24 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-03-09 16:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-07 10:27 ` [PATCH 00/10] sched: EEVDF using latency-nice Vincent Guittot
2023-03-07 13:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-08 15:13 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2023-03-22 6:49 ` K Prateek Nayak
2023-03-22 9:38 ` K Prateek Nayak
2023-03-23 11:53 ` Pavel Machek
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=ZBm39VNJCwioq+V4@chenyu5-mobl1 \
--to=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=chris.hyser@oracle.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=joshdon@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=patrick.bellasi@matbug.net \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=qperret@google.com \
--cc=qyousef@layalina.io \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=timj@gnu.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=youssefesmat@chromium.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