[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081215070139.GE18403@balbir.in.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 12:31:39 +0530
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Suresh B Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
Vatsa <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
David Collier-Brown <davecb@....com>,
Tim Connors <tconnors@...ro.swin.edu.au>,
Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com>,
Gregory Haskins <gregory.haskins@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 4/7] sched: bias task wakeups to preferred
semi-idle packages
* Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> [2008-12-11 23:13:04]:
> Preferred wakeup cpu (from a semi idle package) has been
> nominated in find_busiest_group() in the previous patch. Use
> this information in sched_mc_preferred_wakeup_cpu in function
> wake_idle() to bias task wakeups if the following conditions
> are satisfied:
> - The present cpu that is trying to wakeup the process is
> idle and waking the target process on this cpu will
> potentially wakeup a completely idle package
> - The previous cpu on which the target process ran is
> also idle and hence selecting the previous cpu may
> wakeup a semi idle cpu package
> - The task being woken up is allowed to run in the
> nominated cpu (cpu affinity and restrictions)
>
> Basically if both the current cpu and the previous cpu on
> which the task ran is idle, select the nominated cpu from semi
> idle cpu package for running the new task that is waking up.
>
> Cache hotness is considered since the actual biasing happens
> in wake_idle() only if the application is cache cold.
>
> This technique will effectively move short running bursty jobs in
> a mostly idle system.
>
> Wakeup biasing for power savings gets automatically disabled if
> system utilisation increases due to the fact that the probability
> of finding both this_cpu and prev_cpu idle decreases.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>
> kernel/sched_fair.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched_fair.c b/kernel/sched_fair.c
> index 98345e4..939f2a1 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched_fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched_fair.c
> @@ -1027,6 +1027,23 @@ static int wake_idle(int cpu, struct task_struct *p)
> cpumask_t tmp;
> struct sched_domain *sd;
> int i;
> + unsigned int chosen_wakeup_cpu;
> + int this_cpu;
> +
> + /*
> + * At POWERSAVINGS_BALANCE_WAKEUP level, if both this_cpu and prev_cpu
> + * are idle and this is not a kernel thread and this task's affinity
> + * allows it to be moved to preferred cpu, then just move!
> + */
> +
> + this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
> + chosen_wakeup_cpu =
> + cpu_rq(this_cpu)->rd->sched_mc_preferred_wakeup_cpu;
> +
> + if (sched_mc_power_savings >= POWERSAVINGS_BALANCE_WAKEUP &&
> + idle_cpu(cpu) && idle_cpu(this_cpu) && p->mm &&
The p->mm check is racy, it needs to be done under task_lock(). The
best way to check for a kernel thread is get_task_mm(), followed by
put_task_mm() is the mm is not NULL. We also need to check to see if
the task is _hot_ on cpu. We should negate this optimization in case
chosen_wakeup_cpu is idle, so check for that as well.
> + cpu_isset(chosen_wakeup_cpu, p->cpus_allowed))
> + return chosen_wakeup_cpu;
>
> /*
> * If it is idle, then it is the best cpu to run this task.
>
>
--
Balbir
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists