From: Chen Yu <chen.yu@linux.dev>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Szabina Korbai <szkorbai@linux.ibm.com>,
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
mingo@kernel.org, longman@redhat.com, chenridong@huaweicloud.com,
juri.lelli@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, vschneid@redhat.com,
tj@kernel.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mkoutny@suse.com,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
jstultz@google.com, qyousef@layalina.io, euan@linux.ibm.com,
huschle@linux.ibm.com, yu.c.chen@intel.com, tim.c.chen@intel.com,
philip.li@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] sched: Flatten the pick
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2026 22:51:51 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aoxah90s0bQ4tcUW@three-body> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260818091649.GC1247881@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 11:16:49AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >
> > > Are you using tip:sched/core at commit 68e3748781 ("sched/fair: Fix
> > > flat
> > > hierarchy") for the flat_cg numbers or did you checkout at
> > > 85570f10a4c6
> > > ("sched/eevdf: Move to a single runqueue")?
> > >
> > > There are a couple fixes for vruntime update and Vincent's
> > > optimizations
> > > for preemption bits which might make a difference to the overall
> > > results.
> >
> >
> > Hi Prateek,
> >
> > thank you, that's a good call. I did checkout at "Move to a single
> > runqueue". Let me try it with the fix included, see how the results are
> > affected.
>
> I've not yet managed to digest your various benchmark results, but also
> double check that patch 6/7 from this series is not to 'blame' for the
> some of the changes.
>
> The 0day robot fingered that patch for at least one issue.
>
> In that case the benchmark threads ended up 'heavier' than before, which
> resulted in less preemptions. Probably ksoftirqd getting ran less and
> causing a regression in network throughput for that thing.
>
The 0day' regression was triggered by running netperf/netserver using loopback,
so ksoftirqd was not really running very frequently IMO.
> I did suggest trying to change the slice of ksoftirqd down, such that it
> might be ran more readily, but I'm not sure that ever got tried.
The 0day regression was triggered by running netperf/netserver over loopback,
so ksoftirqd was not running very frequently IIUC.
I borrowed a similar machine(no-SMT, every 4 Cores share L2, 192 Cores) as 0day used.
I asked AI to generate a simple test script based on 0day's reproducer
(attached at the end of this email), and successfully reproduced the regression.
TL;DR,
The decision made by wake_affine_weight() seems to be affected by the increased
weight of the wakee under concur mode. As a result, wake_affine_weight() became less
likely to select this_cpu. This reduced preference for this_cpu leads to a higher
L2 miss rate on this platform, and consequently lower throughput.
Test summary:
| Config | Throughput (Mbps) | **L2 miss%** | **LLC miss%** |
| smp + WA_WEIGHT | **470249** | **19.37%** | 60.08% |
| smp + NO_WA_WEIGHT | 305360 | 32.67% | 60.46% |
| concur + WA_WEIGHT | 338770 | 31.45% | 62.85% |
| concur + NO_WA_WEIGHT | 259358 | 36.24% | 61.95% |
We can see if WA_WEIGHT is disabled in smp mode, the performance drops to concur. One
possible reason is that task_h_load(p) returns a very small value in smp mode(just the
issue that concur wants to fix), whereas it returns a "normal" value in concur mode.
In smp mode, the extremly small value returned by task_h_load(p) can be effectively ignored
in the comparison in wake_affine_weight(). As a result, the condition for returning this_cpu
becomes:
cpu_load(cpu_rq(this_cpu)) * 100 < cpu_load(cpu_rq(prev_cpu) * 108
As a result, this_cpu has a higher chance of being selected in smp mode. In concur mode,
task_h_load(p) is on par with cpu_load(), so it cannot be simply ignored and provides a fairer
basis for choosing between this_cpu and prev_cpu. Since netperf/netserver is a sync wakeup, it
prefers to be co-located on the same CPU/L2 domain for better L2 cache locality.
I'm not sure if this is the expected behavior before I further digging into the details,
a hack patch could restore part of the performance, because it increases the ratio to
return this_cpu:
thanks,
Chenyu
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 6d881e530f89..8bff8b6698a9 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -8385,6 +8385,7 @@ wake_affine_weight(struct sched_domain *sd, struct task_struct *p,
unsigned long task_load;
this_eff_load = cpu_load(cpu_rq(this_cpu));
+ task_load = task_h_load(p);
if (sync) {
unsigned long current_load = task_h_load(current);
@@ -8392,11 +8393,13 @@ wake_affine_weight(struct sched_domain *sd, struct task_struct *p,
if (current_load > this_eff_load)
return this_cpu;
+ /* replace current load with wakee load does no harm */
+ if (sched_feat(WA_SYNC_WEIGHT) && current_load >= task_load)
+ return this_cpu;
+
this_eff_load -= current_load;
}
- task_load = task_h_load(p);
-
this_eff_load += task_load;
if (sched_feat(WA_BIAS))
this_eff_load *= 100;
diff --git a/kernel/sched/features.h b/kernel/sched/features.h
index 8f0dee8fc475..99fabe53fb22 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/features.h
+++ b/kernel/sched/features.h
@@ -129,6 +129,7 @@ SCHED_FEAT(ATTACH_AGE_LOAD, true)
SCHED_FEAT(WA_IDLE, true)
SCHED_FEAT(WA_WEIGHT, true)
SCHED_FEAT(WA_BIAS, true)
+SCHED_FEAT(WA_SYNC_WEIGHT, true)
test command:
NR=$(( $(nproc) * 2 ))
run() {
local mode=$1 waw=$2 tag=$3
echo $mode | sudo -n tee /sys/kernel/debug/sched/cgroup_mode >/dev/null
echo $waw | sudo -n tee /sys/kernel/debug/sched/features >/dev/null
sudo -n pkill -x netserver; sleep 1
netserver -4 >/dev/null 2>&1; sleep 1
rm -f /tmp/m4.$tag
for i in $(seq $NR); do
netperf -4 -H 127.0.0.1 -t TCP_MAERTS -l 70 -P 0 >> /tmp/m4.$tag
2>/dev/null &
done
sleep 15
sudo -n ./tools/perf/perf stat -a \
-e
l2_request.hit,l2_request.miss,longest_lat_cache.reference,longest_lat_cache.miss
\
-x, -o /tmp/p4.$tag -- sleep 20
wait
} >/dev/null 2>&1
run smp WA_WEIGHT smp_waw
run smp NO_WA_WEIGHT smp_nowaw
run concur WA_WEIGHT con_waw
run concur NO_WA_WEIGHT con_nowaw
echo WA_WEIGHT | sudo -n tee /sys/kernel/debug/sched/features >/dev/null
printf "%-12s %10s %8s %10s %10s\n" CONFIG Mbps streams L2miss% LLCmiss%
for t in smp_waw smp_nowaw con_waw con_nowaw; do
read TP NS < <(awk '{s+=$NF;n++} END{print s, n}' /tmp/m4.$t)
awk -F, -v t=$t -v tp=$TP -v ns=$NS '
$3=="l2_request.hit"{h=$1} $3=="l2_request.miss"{m=$1}
$3=="longest_lat_cache.reference"{r=$1}
$3=="longest_lat_cache.miss"{lm=$1}
END{printf "%-12s %10.0f %8d %9.2f%% %9.2f%%\n", t, tp, ns,
100*m/(h+m), 100*lm/r}' /tmp/p4.$t
done
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-23 14:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-05 12:40 [PATCH v3 0/7] sched: Flatten the pick Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-05 12:40 ` [PATCH v3 1/7] sched/fair: Add cgroup_mode switch Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-30 9:03 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-05 12:40 ` [PATCH v3 2/7] sched/fair: Add cgroup_mode: up Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-05 15:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-30 9:03 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-05 12:40 ` [PATCH v3 3/7] sched/fair: Add cgroup_mode: max Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-10 15:09 ` Waiman Long
2026-06-10 15:42 ` Waiman Long
2026-06-11 13:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-11 13:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-11 20:57 ` Waiman Long
2026-06-30 9:03 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-05 12:40 ` [PATCH v3 4/7] sched/fair: Add cgroup_mode: concur Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-30 9:03 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-05 12:40 ` [PATCH v3 5/7] sched/fair: Add cgroup_mode: tasks Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-30 9:03 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-05 12:40 ` [PATCH v3 6/7] sched/fair: Change the default cgroup_mode to concur Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-30 9:03 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-05 12:40 ` [PATCH v3 7/7] sched/eevdf: Move to a single runqueue Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-20 3:54 ` Chen, Yu C
2026-06-26 11:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-06-29 14:02 ` Vincent Guittot
2026-06-30 9:03 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/fair: Fix overflow in update_tg_cfs_runnable() tip-bot2 for Chen, Yu C
2026-06-30 9:03 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/eevdf: Move to a single runqueue tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra (Intel)
2026-06-09 5:37 ` [PATCH v3 0/7] sched: Flatten the pick K Prateek Nayak
2026-06-12 2:29 ` Shubhang Kaushik
2026-08-17 16:05 ` Szabina Korbai
2026-08-17 16:35 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-08-18 9:04 ` Szabina Korbai
2026-08-18 9:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-08-21 10:37 ` Szabina Korbai
2026-08-24 14:51 ` Chen Yu [this message]
2026-08-24 13:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=aoxah90s0bQ4tcUW@three-body \
--to=chen.yu@linux.dev \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chenridong@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=euan@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=huschle@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jstultz@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=philip.li@intel.com \
--cc=qyousef@layalina.io \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=szkorbai@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@intel.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.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