From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
Tao Zhou <ouwen210@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched/fair: prefer prev cpu in asymmetric wakeup path
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:45:40 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <jhjh7qdozu3.mognet@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtC1Y_3-8iRhMDe2eU5MGiHWGV4_Nokiy7LgE2OAnkNE_w@mail.gmail.com>
On 29/10/20 14:19, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 at 12:16, Valentin Schneider
> <valentin.schneider@arm.com> wrote:
>> On legacy big.LITTLE systems, sd_asym_cpucapacity spans all CPUs, so we
>> would iterate over those in select_idle_capacity() anyway - the policy
>> we've been going for is that capacity fitness trumps cache use.
>>
>> This does require the system to have a decent interconnect, cache snooping
>> & co, but that is IMO a requirement of any sane asymmetric system.
>>
>> To put words into code, this is the kind of check I would see:
>>
>> if (static_branch_unlikely(&sched_asym_cpucapacity))
>> return fits_capacity(task_util, capacity_of(cpu));
>> else
>
> You can't make the shortcut that prev will always belong to the domain
> so you have to check that prev belongs to the sd_asym_cpucapacity.
> Even if it's true with current mobile Soc, This code is generic core
> code and must handle any kind of funny topology than HW guys could
> imagine
>
Don't give them any funny ideas! :-)
But yes, you're right in that we could have more than one asym domain span,
although AFAIA that would only be permitted by DynamIQ.
I was about to say that for DynamIQ the shared L3 should make it that the
asym domain commonly matches MC (thus cpus_share_cache()), but phantom
domains wreck that :/ Arguably that isn't upstream's problem though.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-29 14:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-28 17:44 [PATCH v2] sched/fair: prefer prev cpu in asymmetric wakeup path Vincent Guittot
2020-10-29 11:16 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-10-29 13:58 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-10-29 14:19 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-10-29 14:30 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-10-29 14:33 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-10-29 14:45 ` Valentin Schneider [this message]
[not found] ` <BN8PR12MB2978D627EE0D6456DC2EEA6B9A140@BN8PR12MB2978.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
2020-10-29 12:24 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-10-29 13:49 ` 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=jhjh7qdozu3.mognet@arm.com \
--to=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=ouwen210@hotmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--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