public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: tip-bot for Byungchul Park <tipbot@zytor.com>
To: linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org
Cc: hpa@zytor.com, bristot@redhat.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
	kernel-team@lge.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
	mingo@kernel.org, byungchul.park@lge.com, juri.lelli@gmail.com
Subject: [tip:sched/core] sched/deadline: Make find_later_rq() choose a closer CPU in topology
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 05:08:16 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <tip-b18c3ca11c20caa4a397baa9b893ebc4aaa4fe9f@git.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1495504859-10960-2-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com>

Commit-ID:  b18c3ca11c20caa4a397baa9b893ebc4aaa4fe9f
Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/b18c3ca11c20caa4a397baa9b893ebc4aaa4fe9f
Author:     Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
AuthorDate: Tue, 23 May 2017 11:00:56 +0900
Committer:  Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
CommitDate: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 12:18:17 +0200

sched/deadline: Make find_later_rq() choose a closer CPU in topology

When cpudl_find() returns any among free_cpus, the CPU might not be
closer than others, considering sched domain. For example:

   this_cpu: 15
   free_cpus: 0, 1,..., 14 (== later_mask)
   best_cpu: 0

   topology:

   0 --+
       +--+
   1 --+  |
          +-- ... --+
   2 --+  |         |
       +--+         |
   3 --+            |

   ...             ...

   12 --+           |
        +--+        |
   13 --+  |        |
           +-- ... -+
   14 --+  |
        +--+
   15 --+

In this case, it would be best to select 14 since it's a free CPU and
closest to 15 (this_cpu). However, currently the code selects 0 (best_cpu)
even though that's just any among free_cpus. Fix it.

This (re)aligns the deadline behaviour with the rt behaviour.

Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: <bristot@redhat.com>
Cc: <juri.lelli@gmail.com>
Cc: <kernel-team@lge.com>
Cc: <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1495504859-10960-2-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
---
 kernel/sched/deadline.c | 27 ++++++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
index a205ac7..ac07d7c 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
@@ -1798,7 +1798,7 @@ static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task)
 	struct sched_domain *sd;
 	struct cpumask *later_mask = this_cpu_cpumask_var_ptr(local_cpu_mask_dl);
 	int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
-	int best_cpu, cpu = task_cpu(task);
+	int cpu = task_cpu(task);
 
 	/* Make sure the mask is initialized first */
 	if (unlikely(!later_mask))
@@ -1811,17 +1811,14 @@ static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task)
 	 * We have to consider system topology and task affinity
 	 * first, then we can look for a suitable cpu.
 	 */
-	best_cpu = cpudl_find(&task_rq(task)->rd->cpudl,
-			task, later_mask);
-	if (best_cpu == -1)
+	if (cpudl_find(&task_rq(task)->rd->cpudl, task, later_mask) == -1)
 		return -1;
 
 	/*
-	 * If we are here, some target has been found,
-	 * the most suitable of which is cached in best_cpu.
-	 * This is, among the runqueues where the current tasks
-	 * have later deadlines than the task's one, the rq
-	 * with the latest possible one.
+	 * If we are here, some targets have been found, including
+	 * the most suitable which is, among the runqueues where the
+	 * current tasks have later deadlines than the task's one, the
+	 * rq with the latest possible one.
 	 *
 	 * Now we check how well this matches with task's
 	 * affinity and system topology.
@@ -1841,6 +1838,7 @@ static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task)
 	rcu_read_lock();
 	for_each_domain(cpu, sd) {
 		if (sd->flags & SD_WAKE_AFFINE) {
+			int best_cpu;
 
 			/*
 			 * If possible, preempting this_cpu is
@@ -1852,12 +1850,15 @@ static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task)
 				return this_cpu;
 			}
 
+			best_cpu = cpumask_first_and(later_mask,
+							sched_domain_span(sd));
 			/*
-			 * Last chance: if best_cpu is valid and is
-			 * in the mask, that becomes our choice.
+			 * Last chance: if a cpu being in both later_mask
+			 * and current sd span is valid, that becomes our
+			 * choice. Of course, the latest possible cpu is
+			 * already under consideration through later_mask.
 			 */
-			if (best_cpu < nr_cpu_ids &&
-			    cpumask_test_cpu(best_cpu, sched_domain_span(sd))) {
+			if (best_cpu < nr_cpu_ids) {
 				rcu_read_unlock();
 				return best_cpu;
 			}

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-08-10 12:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-23  2:00 [PATCH v5 0/4] Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park
2017-05-23  2:00 ` [PATCH v5 1/4] sched/deadline: " Byungchul Park
2017-07-12 13:13   ` Juri Lelli
2017-07-13  1:38     ` Byungchul Park
2017-08-10 12:08   ` tip-bot for Byungchul Park [this message]
2017-05-23  2:00 ` [PATCH v5 2/4] sched/deadline: Change return value of cpudl_find() Byungchul Park
2017-07-12 13:22   ` Juri Lelli
2017-07-13  1:24     ` Byungchul Park
2017-08-10 12:08   ` [tip:sched/core] " tip-bot for Byungchul Park
2017-05-23  2:00 ` [PATCH v5 3/4] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-08-03 12:03   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-04  5:16     ` Byungchul Park
2017-05-23  2:00 ` [PATCH v5 4/4] sched/rt: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_lowest_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-06-02  2:19 ` [PATCH v5 0/4] Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park
2017-07-12  2:44 ` Byungchul Park

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=tip-b18c3ca11c20caa4a397baa9b893ebc4aaa4fe9f@git.kernel.org \
    --to=tipbot@zytor.com \
    --cc=bristot@redhat.com \
    --cc=byungchul.park@lge.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@lge.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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