public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
To: luca abeni <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it>
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
	Wei Wang <wvw@google.com>, Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>,
	Alessio Balsini <balsini@google.com>,
	Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@codeaurora.org>,
	Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@matbug.net>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
	Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] sched/deadline: Improve admission control for asymmetric CPU capacities
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2020 16:01:43 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <jhjblo2vx60.mognet@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200408153032.447e098d@nowhere>


On 08/04/20 14:30, luca abeni wrote:
>>
>> I don't think this is strictly equivalent to what we have now for the
>> SMP case. 'cpus' used to come from dl_bw_cpus(), which is an ugly way
>> of writing
>>
>>      cpumask_weight(rd->span AND cpu_active_mask);
>>
>> The rd->cpu_capacity_orig field you added gets set once per domain
>> rebuild, so it also happens in sched_cpu_(de)activate() but is
>> separate from touching cpu_active_mask. AFAICT this mean we can
>> observe a CPU as !active but still see its capacity_orig accounted in
>> a root_domain.
>
> Sorry, I suspect this is my fault, because the bug comes from my
> original patch.
> When I wrote the original code, I believed that when a CPU is
> deactivated it is also removed from its root domain.
>
> I now see that I was wrong.
>

Well it is indeed the case, but sadly it's not an atomic step - AFAICT with
cpusets we do hold some cpuset lock when calling __dl_overflow() and when
rebuilding the domains, but not when fiddling with the active mask.

I just realized it's even more obvious for dl_cpu_busy(): IIUC it is meant
to prevent the removal of a CPU if it would lead to a DL overflow - it
works now because the active mask is modified before it gets called, but
here it breaks because it's called before the sched_domain rebuild.

Perhaps re-computing the root domain capacity sum at every dl_bw_cpus()
call would be simpler. It's a bit more work, but then we already have a
for_each_cpu_*() loop, and we only rely on the masks being correct.

>
>                       Luca

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-04-08 15:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-04-08  9:50 [PATCH 0/4] Capacity awareness for SCHED_DEADLINE Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-08  9:50 ` [PATCH 1/4] sched/topology: Store root domain CPU capacity sum Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-08 12:29   ` Vincent Guittot
2020-04-08 16:30     ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-08 17:03       ` Vincent Guittot
2020-04-09 13:50         ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-09 14:13           ` Vincent Guittot
2020-04-14  9:20             ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-14 12:45         ` Quentin Perret
2020-04-14 15:27           ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-14 15:43             ` Vincent Guittot
2020-04-08  9:50 ` [PATCH 2/4] sched/deadline: Improve admission control for asymmetric CPU capacities Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-08 10:42   ` Valentin Schneider
2020-04-08 12:26     ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-08 13:30     ` luca abeni
2020-04-08 14:23       ` Qais Yousef
2020-04-08 15:01       ` Valentin Schneider [this message]
2020-04-09 17:29         ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-14 11:40           ` Qais Yousef
2020-04-14 14:29             ` Valentin Schneider
2020-04-14 15:41               ` Qais Yousef
2020-04-14 14:28           ` Valentin Schneider
2020-04-17 12:19           ` Juri Lelli
2020-04-17 14:55             ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-17 15:08               ` Juri Lelli
2020-04-17 15:47                 ` Juri Lelli
2020-04-08  9:50 ` [PATCH 3/4] sched/deadline: Make DL capacity-aware Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-10 12:52   ` Juri Lelli
2020-04-15  9:39     ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-15 13:20       ` Juri Lelli
2020-04-15 16:42         ` luca abeni
2020-04-16 13:19           ` Juri Lelli
2020-04-08  9:50 ` [PATCH 4/4] sched/deadline: Implement fallback mechanism for !fit case Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-09 10:25   ` Qais Yousef
2020-04-09 13:00     ` luca abeni
2020-04-09 14:55       ` Qais Yousef
2020-04-09 18:43         ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-14 11:29           ` Qais Yousef

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=jhjblo2vx60.mognet@arm.com \
    --to=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --cc=balsini@google.com \
    --cc=bristot@redhat.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luca.abeni@santannapisa.it \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
    --cc=patrick.bellasi@matbug.net \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pkondeti@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \
    --cc=qperret@google.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=wvw@google.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