From: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, vschneid@redhat.com,
tj@kernel.org, void@manifault.com, arighi@nvidia.com,
changwoo@igalia.com, sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, mingo@kernel.org,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] sched/fair: Avoid rq->lock bouncing in sched_balance_newidle()
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2025 00:29:00 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b26d7ab3-e07b-407b-bb24-6741d4043315@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251127154725.532469061@infradead.org>
On 11/27/25 9:09 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> While poking at this code recently I noted we do a pointless
> unlock+lock cycle in sched_balance_newidle(). We drop the rq->lock (so
> we can balance) but then instantly grab the same rq->lock again in
> sched_balance_update_blocked_averages().
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> ---
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -9902,15 +9902,11 @@ static unsigned long task_h_load(struct
> }
> #endif /* !CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED */
>
> -static void sched_balance_update_blocked_averages(int cpu)
> +static void __sched_balance_update_blocked_averages(struct rq *rq)
> {
> bool decayed = false, done = true;
> - struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> - struct rq_flags rf;
>
> - rq_lock_irqsave(rq, &rf);
> update_blocked_load_tick(rq);
> - update_rq_clock(rq);
>
> decayed |= __update_blocked_others(rq, &done);
> decayed |= __update_blocked_fair(rq, &done);
> @@ -9918,7 +9914,15 @@ static void sched_balance_update_blocked
> update_blocked_load_status(rq, !done);
> if (decayed)
> cpufreq_update_util(rq, 0);
> - rq_unlock_irqrestore(rq, &rf);
> +}
> +
> +static void sched_balance_update_blocked_averages(int cpu)
> +{
> + struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> +
> + guard(rq_lock_irqsave)(rq);
> + update_rq_clock(rq);
> + __sched_balance_update_blocked_averages(rq);
> }
>
> /********** Helpers for sched_balance_find_src_group ************************/
> @@ -12865,12 +12869,17 @@ static int sched_balance_newidle(struct
> }
> rcu_read_unlock();
>
> + /*
> + * Include sched_balance_update_blocked_averages() in the cost
> + * calculation because it can be quite costly -- this ensures we skip
> + * it when avg_idle gets to be very low.
> + */
> + t0 = sched_clock_cpu(this_cpu);
> + __sched_balance_update_blocked_averages(this_rq);
> +
I think we do update_rq_clock earlier as early as __schedule.
no warnings seen.
Reviewed-by: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-29 18:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-27 15:39 [PATCH 0/5] sched: Random collection of patches Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-27 15:39 ` [PATCH 1/5] sched/fair: Fold the sched_avg update Peter Zijlstra
2025-12-14 7:46 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2025-12-14 7:46 ` [tip: sched/core] <linux/compiler_types.h>: Add the __signed_scalar_typeof() helper tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-27 15:39 ` [PATCH 2/5] sched/fair: Avoid rq->lock bouncing in sched_balance_newidle() Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-29 18:59 ` Shrikanth Hegde [this message]
2025-12-14 7:46 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-27 15:39 ` [PATCH 3/5] sched: Change rcu_dereference_check_sched_domain() to rcu-sched Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-28 10:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-28 11:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-28 11:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-11-28 11:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-12-14 7:46 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/fair: Remove superfluous rcu_read_lock() tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-27 15:39 ` [PATCH 4/5] sched: Add assertions to QUEUE_CLASS Peter Zijlstra
2025-12-14 7:46 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/core: " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2025-12-18 10:09 ` [PATCH 4/5] sched: " Marek Szyprowski
2025-12-18 10:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-27 15:39 ` [PATCH 5/5] sched: Rework sched_class::wakeup_preempt() and rq_modified_*() Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-28 13:26 ` Kuba Piecuch
2025-11-28 13:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-28 13:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-28 22:29 ` Andrea Righi
2025-11-29 18:08 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-11-30 11:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-30 13:03 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-12-02 23:27 ` Tejun Heo
2025-12-14 7:46 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/core: " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2025-12-15 6:07 ` error: implicit declaration of function ‘rq_modified_clear’ (was [PATCH 5/5] sched: Rework sched_class::wakeup_preempt() and rq_modified_*()) Thorsten Leemhuis
2025-12-15 7:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2025-12-15 11:51 ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-12-16 7:02 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2025-12-16 18:40 ` Tejun Heo
2025-12-16 21:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-12-17 9:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-12-15 7:59 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/core: Rework sched_class::wakeup_preempt() and rq_modified_*() tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2025-12-17 10:02 ` tip-bot2 for 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=b26d7ab3-e07b-407b-bb24-6741d4043315@linux.ibm.com \
--to=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=void@manifault.com \
--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