From: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Parth Shah <parth@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Prefer idle CPU to cache affinity
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2021 14:56:07 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ab046b9d5bcd29b2eb759cd999e2f578a683c673.camel@surriel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210226164029.122432-1-srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1878 bytes --]
On Fri, 2021-02-26 at 22:10 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> Current order of preference to pick a LLC while waking a wake-affine
> task:
> 1. Between the waker CPU and previous CPU, prefer the LLC of the CPU
> that is idle.
>
> 2. Between the waker CPU and previous CPU, prefer the LLC of the CPU
> that is less lightly loaded.
>
> In the current situation where waker and previous CPUs are busy, but
> only one of its LLC has an idle CPU, Scheduler may end up picking a
> LLC
> with no idle CPUs. To mitigate this, add a new step between 1 and 2
> where Scheduler compares idle CPUs in waker and previous LLCs and
> picks
> the appropriate one.
I like that idea a lot. That could also solve some of the
issues sometimes observed on multi-node x86 systems, and
probably on the newer AMD chips with several LLCs on chip.
> + if (sched_feat(WA_WAKER) && tnr_busy < tllc_size)
> + return this_cpu;
I wonder if we need to use a slightly lower threshold on
very large LLCs, both to account for the fact that the
select_idle_cpu code may not find the single idle CPU
among a dozen busy ones, or because on a system with
hyperthreading we may often be better off picking another
LLC for HT contention issues?
Maybe we could use "tnr_busy * 4 <
tllc_size * 3" or
something like that?
That way we will only try to find the last 5 idle
CPUs
in a 22 CPU LLC if the other LLC also has fewer than 6
idle cores.
That might increase our chances of finding an idle CPU
with SIS_PROP enabled, and might allow WA_WAKER to be
true by default.
> + /* For better wakeup latency, prefer idler LLC to cache
> affinity */
> + diff = tnr_busy * pllc_size - sync - pnr_busy * tllc_size;
> + if (!diff)
> + return nr_cpumask_bits;
> + if (diff < 0)
> + return this_cpu;
> +
> + return prev_cpu;
> +}
--
All Rights Reversed.
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-27 19:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-26 16:40 [PATCH] sched/fair: Prefer idle CPU to cache affinity Srikar Dronamraju
2021-02-27 19:56 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2021-03-01 13:37 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-03-01 15:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-01 17:06 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-03-01 17:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-02 7:39 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-03-02 9:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-02 10:05 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-03-01 15:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-01 17:08 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-03-02 9:53 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2021-03-02 10:04 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-03-08 13:52 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-03-10 5:52 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-03-10 15:37 ` 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=ab046b9d5bcd29b2eb759cd999e2f578a683c673.camel@surriel.com \
--to=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mikey@neuling.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=parth@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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