[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130703085025.GG23916@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 10:50:25 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Michael Wang <wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Nikunj A. Dadhania" <nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched: smart wake-affine
On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 02:10:32PM +0800, Michael Wang wrote:
> +static int wake_wide(struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + int factor = nr_cpus_node(cpu_to_node(smp_processor_id()));
That's still a cpumask_weight() in there... we should avoid that. How
about something like the below:
> +
> + /*
> + * Yeah, it's the switching-frequency, could means many wakee or
> + * rapidly switch, use factor here will just help to automatically
> + * adjust the loose-degree, so bigger node will lead to more pull.
> + */
> + if (p->nr_wakee_switch > factor) {
> + /*
> + * wakee is somewhat hot, it needs certain amount of cpu
> + * resource, so if waker is far more hot, prefer to leave
> + * it alone.
> + */
> + if (current->nr_wakee_switch > (factor * p->nr_wakee_switch))
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
---
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 9b1f2e5..166ab9b 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -5081,18 +5083,23 @@ static void destroy_sched_domains(struct sched_domain *sd, int cpu)
* two cpus are in the same cache domain, see cpus_share_cache().
*/
DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct sched_domain *, sd_llc);
+DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, sd_llc_size);
DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, sd_llc_id);
static void update_top_cache_domain(int cpu)
{
struct sched_domain *sd;
int id = cpu;
+ int size = 1;
sd = highest_flag_domain(cpu, SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES);
- if (sd)
+ if (sd) {
id = cpumask_first(sched_domain_span(sd));
+ size = cpumask_weight(sched_domain_span(sd));
+ }
rcu_assign_pointer(per_cpu(sd_llc, cpu), sd);
+ per_cpu(sd_llc_size, cpu) = size;
per_cpu(sd_llc_id, cpu) = id;
}
diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
index ef0a7b2..c992f58 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
+++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
@@ -595,6 +595,7 @@ static inline struct sched_domain *highest_flag_domain(int cpu, int flag)
}
DECLARE_PER_CPU(struct sched_domain *, sd_llc);
+DECLARE_PER_CPU(int, sd_llc_size);
DECLARE_PER_CPU(int, sd_llc_id);
struct sched_group_power {
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -3175,7 +3175,7 @@ static inline unsigned long effective_lo
static int wake_wide(struct task_struct *p)
{
- int factor = nr_cpus_node(cpu_to_node(smp_processor_id()));
+ int factor = this_cpu_read(sd_llc_size);
/*
* Yeah, it's the switching-frequency, could means many wakee or
--
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