From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
To: Qi Zheng <arch0.zheng@gmail.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Remove the duplicate check from group_has_capacity()
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 19:33:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <jhjwo26gxlb.mognet@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200810010009.92758-1-arch0.zheng@gmail.com>
On 10/08/20 02:00, Qi Zheng wrote:
> 1. The group_has_capacity() function is only called in
> group_classify().
> 2. The following inequality has already been checked in
> group_is_overloaded() which was also called in
> group_classify().
>
> (sgs->group_capacity * imbalance_pct) <
> (sgs->group_runnable * 100)
>
Consider group_is_overloaded() returns false because of the first
condition:
if (sgs->sum_nr_running <= sgs->group_weight)
return false;
then group_has_capacity() would be the first place where the group_runnable
vs group_capacity comparison would be done.
Now in that specific case we'll actually only check it if
sgs->sum_nr_running == sgs->group_weight
and the only case where the runnable vs capacity check can fail here is if
there's significant capacity pressure going on. TBH this capacity pressure
could be happening even when there are fewer tasks than CPUs, so I'm not
sure how intentional that corner case is.
For the
sgs->sum_nr_running > sgs->group_weight
case I agree with your patch, there just is that oddity at the == case.
> So just remove the duplicate check from group_has_capacity().
>
> Signed-off-by: Qi Zheng <arch0.zheng@gmail.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 4 ----
> 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 2ba8f230feb9..a41903fb327a 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -8234,10 +8234,6 @@ group_has_capacity(unsigned int imbalance_pct, struct sg_lb_stats *sgs)
> if (sgs->sum_nr_running < sgs->group_weight)
> return true;
>
> - if ((sgs->group_capacity * imbalance_pct) <
> - (sgs->group_runnable * 100))
> - return false;
> -
> if ((sgs->group_capacity * 100) >
> (sgs->group_util * imbalance_pct))
> return true;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-10 18:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-10 1:00 [PATCH] sched/fair: Remove the duplicate check from group_has_capacity() Qi Zheng
2020-08-10 18:33 ` Valentin Schneider [this message]
2020-08-11 3:39 ` Qi Zheng
2020-08-11 10:38 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-08-11 11:44 ` Qi Zheng
2020-08-11 12:48 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-08-11 13:12 ` Qi Zheng
2020-08-11 20:16 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-08-12 0:46 ` Qi Zheng
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=jhjwo26gxlb.mognet@arm.com \
--to=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=arch0.zheng@gmail.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=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