From: "Chen, Yu C" <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
To: Pan Deng <pan.deng@intel.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <tianyou.li@intel.com>,
<tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>, <peterz@infradead.org>,
<mingo@kernel.org>, Chen Yu <yu.chen.surf@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] sched/rt: Optimize cpupri_vec layout to mitigate cache line contention
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2025 13:10:19 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a17428e9-0221-44ff-8a10-6cf93a00c172@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c3fa01bed2f875293ac65425c75a322e8e70e1d3.1751852370.git.pan.deng@intel.com>
On 7/7/2025 10:35 AM, Pan Deng wrote:
> When running a multi-instance FFmpeg workload on an HCC system, significant
> cache line contention is observed around `cpupri_vec->count` and `mask` in
> struct root_domain.
>
[it seems that my last reply did not make it to the lkml][snip]
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpupri.h b/kernel/sched/cpupri.h
> index d6cba0020064..245b0fa626be 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/cpupri.h
> +++ b/kernel/sched/cpupri.h
> @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
>
> struct cpupri_vec {
> atomic_t count;
> - cpumask_var_t mask;
> + cpumask_var_t mask ____cacheline_aligned;
Just curious, since this is to avoid cache contention among CPUs,
is it better to use ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp, so the single
CPU system is not impacted.
thanks,
Chenyu> };
>
> struct cpupri {
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-01 5:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-07 2:35 [PATCH 0/4] sched/rt: mitigate root_domain cache line contention Pan Deng
2025-07-07 2:35 ` [PATCH 1/4] sched/rt: Optimize cpupri_vec layout to mitigate " Pan Deng
2025-09-01 5:10 ` Chen, Yu C [this message]
2025-09-01 13:24 ` Deng, Pan
2025-07-07 2:35 ` [PATCH 2/4] sched/rt: Restructure root_domain to reduce cacheline contention Pan Deng
2025-07-07 2:35 ` [PATCH 3/4] sched/rt: Split root_domain->rto_count to per-NUMA-node counters Pan Deng
2025-07-07 6:53 ` kernel test robot
2025-07-07 11:36 ` Deng, Pan
2025-07-07 6:53 ` kernel test robot
2025-07-08 5:33 ` kernel test robot
2025-07-08 14:02 ` Deng, Pan
2025-07-09 8:56 ` Li, Philip
2025-07-07 2:35 ` [PATCH 4/4] sched/rt: Split cpupri_vec->cpumask to per NUMA node to reduce contention Pan Deng
2025-07-21 11:23 ` Chen, Yu C
2025-07-22 14:46 ` Deng, Pan
2025-08-06 14:00 ` Deng, Pan
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=a17428e9-0221-44ff-8a10-6cf93a00c172@intel.com \
--to=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=pan.deng@intel.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tianyou.li@intel.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=yu.chen.surf@gmail.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).