From: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>,
Changwoo Min <changwoo@igalia.com>,
Dan Schatzberg <schatzberg.dan@gmail.com>,
Emil Tsalapatis <etsal@meta.com>,
sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/13] sched_ext: Use per-CPU DSQs instead of per-node global DSQs in bypass mode
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2025 18:30:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aRIhUIcDnjrGIoJf@gpd4> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aRIWEBDmjxScAsyP@slm.duckdns.org>
On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 06:42:56AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 08:42:47AM +0100, Andrea Righi wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 09, 2025 at 08:31:03AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > Change bypass mode to use dedicated per-CPU bypass DSQs. Each task is queued
> > > on the CPU that it's currently on. Because the default idle CPU selection
> > > policy and direct dispatch are both active during bypass, this works well in
> > > most cases including the above.
> >
> > Is there any reason not to reuse rq->scx.local_dsq for this?
> ...
> > > The bypass DSQ is kept separate from
> > > the local DSQ to allow the load balancer to move tasks between bypass DSQs.
>
> This is the explanation for that. More detailed explanation is that local
> DSQs are protected by rq locks and that makes load balancing across them
> more complicated - ie. we can't keep scanning and transferring while holding
> the source DSQ and if the system is already heavily contended, the system
> may already be melting down on rq locks.
Ok, thanks for the explanation, makes sense and it's definitely better than
what we have right now, so:
Reviewed-by: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
-Andrea
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-10 17:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-09 18:30 [PATCHSET sched_ext/for-6.19] sched_ext: Improve bypass mode scalability Tejun Heo
2025-11-09 18:31 ` [PATCH 01/13] sched_ext: Don't set ddsp_dsq_id during select_cpu in bypass mode Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 6:57 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-10 16:08 ` Tejun Heo
2025-11-09 18:31 ` [PATCH 02/13] sched_ext: Make slice values tunable and use shorter slice " Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 7:03 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-10 7:59 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-10 16:21 ` Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 16:22 ` Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 8:22 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-11 14:57 ` Dan Schatzberg
2025-11-09 18:31 ` [PATCH 03/13] sched_ext: Refactor do_enqueue_task() local and global DSQ paths Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 7:21 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-09 18:31 ` [PATCH 04/13] sched_ext: Use per-CPU DSQs instead of per-node global DSQs in bypass mode Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 7:42 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-10 16:42 ` Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 17:30 ` Andrea Righi [this message]
2025-11-11 15:31 ` Dan Schatzberg
2025-11-09 18:31 ` [PATCH 05/13] sched_ext: Simplify breather mechanism with scx_aborting flag Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 7:45 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-11 15:34 ` Dan Schatzberg
2025-11-09 18:31 ` [PATCH 06/13] sched_ext: Exit dispatch and move operations immediately when aborting Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 8:20 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-10 18:51 ` Tejun Heo
2025-11-11 15:46 ` Dan Schatzberg
2025-11-09 18:31 ` [PATCH 07/13] sched_ext: Make scx_exit() and scx_vexit() return bool Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 8:28 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-11 15:48 ` Dan Schatzberg
2025-11-09 18:31 ` [PATCH 08/13] sched_ext: Refactor lockup handlers into handle_lockup() Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 8:29 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-11 15:49 ` Dan Schatzberg
2025-11-09 18:31 ` [PATCH 09/13] sched_ext: Make handle_lockup() propagate scx_verror() result Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 8:29 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-09 18:31 ` [PATCH 10/13] sched_ext: Hook up hardlockup detector Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 8:31 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-09 18:31 ` [PATCH 11/13] sched_ext: Add scx_cpu0 example scheduler Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 8:36 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-10 18:44 ` Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 21:06 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-10 22:08 ` Tejun Heo
2025-11-09 18:31 ` [PATCH 12/13] sched_ext: Factor out scx_dsq_list_node cursor initialization into INIT_DSQ_LIST_CURSOR Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 8:37 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-09 18:31 ` [PATCH 13/13] sched_ext: Implement load balancer for bypass mode Tejun Heo
2025-11-10 9:38 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-10 19:21 ` Tejun Heo
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=aRIhUIcDnjrGIoJf@gpd4 \
--to=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=etsal@meta.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=schatzberg.dan@gmail.com \
--cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=void@manifault.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