[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1358759355.4994.108.camel@marge.simpson.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:09:15 +0100
From: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>
To: Michael Wang <wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...nel.org, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] sched: simplify the select_task_rq_fair()
On Mon, 2013-01-21 at 15:45 +0800, Michael Wang wrote:
> On 01/21/2013 03:09 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-01-21 at 07:42 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2013-01-21 at 13:07 +0800, Michael Wang wrote:
> >
> >>> May be we could try change this back to the old way later, after the aim
> >>> 7 test on my server.
> >>
> >> Yeah, something funny is going on.
> >
> > Never entering balance path kills the collapse. Asking wake_affine()
> > wrt the pull as before, but allowing us to continue should no idle cpu
> > be found, still collapsed. So the source of funny behavior is indeed in
> > balance_path.
>
> Below patch based on the patch set could help to avoid enter balance path
> if affine_sd could be found, just like the old logical, would you like to
> take a try and see whether it could help fix the collapse?
No, it does not.
>
> Regards,
> Michael Wang
>
> ---
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 14 ++++++++------
> 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index d600708..4e95bb0 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -3297,6 +3297,8 @@ next:
> sg = sg->next;
> } while (sg != sd->groups);
> }
> +
> + return -1;
> done:
> return target;
> }
> @@ -3349,7 +3351,7 @@ select_task_rq_fair(struct task_struct *p, int sd_flag, int wake_flags)
> * some cases.
> */
> new_cpu = select_idle_sibling(p, prev_cpu);
> - if (idle_cpu(new_cpu))
> + if (new_cpu != -1)
> goto unlock;
>
> /*
> @@ -3363,15 +3365,15 @@ select_task_rq_fair(struct task_struct *p, int sd_flag, int wake_flags)
> goto balance_path;
>
> new_cpu = select_idle_sibling(p, cpu);
> - if (!idle_cpu(new_cpu))
> - goto balance_path;
> -
> /*
> * Invoke wake_affine() finally since it is no doubt a
> * performance killer.
> */
> - if (wake_affine(sbm->affine_map[prev_cpu], p, sync))
> - goto unlock;
> + if (new_cpu == -1 ||
> + !wake_affine(sbm->affine_map[prev_cpu], p, sync))
> + new_cpu = prev_cpu;
> +
> + goto unlock;
> }
>
> balance_path:
--
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