From: Vishal Chourasia <vishalc@linux.ibm.com>
To: Steve Wahl <steve.wahl@hpe.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
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>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Russ Anderson <rja@hpe.com>,
Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@hpe.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/topology: improve topology_span_sane speed
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2024 18:49:15 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zxj30yQDRmLd2EGO@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZxZ_arDwEu489GkN@swahl-home.5wahls.com>
On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 11:20:58AM -0500, Steve Wahl wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 05:05:43PM +0530, Vishal Chourasia wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 10:51:11AM -0500, Steve Wahl wrote:
> > @@ -2417,9 +2446,6 @@ build_sched_domains(const struct cpumask *cpu_map, struct sched_domain_attr *att
> > > sd = NULL;
> > > for_each_sd_topology(tl) {
> > >
> > > - if (WARN_ON(!topology_span_sane(tl, cpu_map, i)))
> > > - goto error;
> > > -
> > > sd = build_sched_domain(tl, cpu_map, attr, sd, i);
> > >
> > > has_asym |= sd->flags & SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY;
> > > @@ -2433,6 +2459,9 @@ build_sched_domains(const struct cpumask *cpu_map, struct sched_domain_attr *att
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> > > + if (WARN_ON(!topology_span_sane(cpu_map)))
> > > + goto error;
> > Hi Steve,
>
> Vishal, thank you for taking the time to review.
>
> > Is there any reason why above check is done after initializing
> > sched domain struct for all the CPUs in the cpu_map?
>
> The original check was done in the same for_each_sd_topology(tl) loop
> that calls build_sched_domain(). I had trouble 100% convincing myself
> that calls to build_sched_domain() on the previous levels couldn't
> affect calls to tl->mask() in later levels, so I placed the new check
> after all calls to build_sched_domain were complete.
>
Yeah, I don't see build_sched_domain() modifying the cpumask
returned from tl->mask(cpu)
> > It looks to me, that this check can be performed before the call to
> > __visit_domain_allocation_hell() in the build_sched_domains()
> > resulting in early return if topology_span_sane() detects incorrect
> > topology.
>
> This might be OK to do. I would greatly appreciate somebody well
> versed in this code area telling me for certain that it would work.
>
Same.
> > Also, the error path in the current code only cleans up d->rd struct, keeping
> > all the work done by build_sched_domain() inside the loop and __alloc_sdt()
> > called from __visit_domain_allocation_hell()
> >
> > is it because we need all that work to remain intact?
>
> I'm not seeing this. The return from __visit_domain_allocation_hell()
> is stored in alloc_state immediately checked to be == sa_rootdomain;
> if not, the error path is taken, deallocating everything and
> returning.
>
> The rest of the function does not touch alloc_state, so any error from
> that point on makes the call to __free_domain_allocs with what ==
> sa_rootdomain, which seems to undo everything.
>
> Are you possibly missing the fallthroughs in __free_domain_allocs()
> even though they're clearly emphasized?
>
Yes, you are right. Thank you for pointing that out.
> > static void __free_domain_allocs(struct s_data *d, enum s_alloc what,
> > const struct cpumask *cpu_map)
> > {
> > switch (what) {
> > case sa_rootdomain:
> > if (!atomic_read(&d->rd->refcount))
> > free_rootdomain(&d->rd->rcu);
> > fallthrough;
> > case sa_sd:
> > free_percpu(d->sd);
> > fallthrough;
> > case sa_sd_storage:
> > __sdt_free(cpu_map);
> > fallthrough;
> > case sa_none:
> > break;
> > }
> > }
> >
>
> Thanks,
>
> --> Steve Wahl
>
> --
> Steve Wahl, Hewlett Packard Enterprise
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-23 13:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-10 15:51 [PATCH] sched/topology: improve topology_span_sane speed Steve Wahl
2024-10-15 10:20 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-10-15 11:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-15 22:32 ` Steve Wahl
2024-10-15 22:19 ` Steve Wahl
2024-10-15 14:37 ` Valentin Schneider
2024-10-16 8:10 ` Valentin Schneider
2024-10-16 16:08 ` Steve Wahl
2024-10-25 15:06 ` Steve Wahl
2024-10-25 17:21 ` Valentin Schneider
2024-10-18 11:35 ` Vishal Chourasia
2024-10-21 16:20 ` Steve Wahl
2024-10-23 13:19 ` Vishal Chourasia [this message]
2024-10-23 15:16 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2024-10-29 17:34 ` samir
2024-11-01 20:05 ` Steve Wahl
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=Zxj30yQDRmLd2EGO@linux.ibm.com \
--to=vishalc@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rja@hpe.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sivanich@hpe.com \
--cc=steve.wahl@hpe.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.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