[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKfTPtB_xsb0LpYu6ye0x5SK3+TcPhZ1uNioo_OtX+bjP15DsA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 11:31:33 +0100
From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
To: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
LAK <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Morten Rasmussen <Morten.Rasmussen@....com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
"linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/12] sched: fix imbalance flag reset
On 23 November 2014 at 11:25, Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi Vincent,
> On 7/29/14, 1:51 AM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>>
>> The imbalance flag can stay set whereas there is no imbalance.
>>
>> Let assume that we have 3 tasks that run on a dual cores /dual cluster
>> system.
>> We will have some idle load balance which are triggered during tick.
>> Unfortunately, the tick is also used to queue background work so we can
>> reach
>> the situation where short work has been queued on a CPU which already runs
>> a
>> task. The load balance will detect this imbalance (2 tasks on 1 CPU and an
>> idle
>> CPU) and will try to pull the waiting task on the idle CPU. The waiting
>> task is
>> a worker thread that is pinned on a CPU so an imbalance due to pinned task
>> is
>> detected and the imbalance flag is set.
>
>
> The waiting task is the third task or one the '2 tasks on 1 CPU' ?
The waiting task is one of the 2 tasks on 1 CPU (the worker)
Regards,
Vincent
>
> Regards,
> Wanpeng Li
>
>
>> Then, we will not be able to clear the flag because we have at most 1 task
>> on
>> each CPU but the imbalance flag will trig to useless active load balance
>> between the idle CPU and the busy CPU.
>>
>> We need to reset of the imbalance flag as soon as we have reached a
>> balanced
>> state. If all tasks are pinned, we don't consider that as a balanced state
>> and
>> let the imbalance flag set.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
>> ---
>> kernel/sched/fair.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++----
>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index 923fe32..7eb9126 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -6672,10 +6672,8 @@ static int load_balance(int this_cpu, struct rq
>> *this_rq,
>> if (sd_parent) {
>> int *group_imbalance =
>> &sd_parent->groups->sgc->imbalance;
>> - if ((env.flags & LBF_SOME_PINNED) && env.imbalance
>> > 0) {
>> + if ((env.flags & LBF_SOME_PINNED) && env.imbalance
>> > 0)
>> *group_imbalance = 1;
>> - } else if (*group_imbalance)
>> - *group_imbalance = 0;
>> }
>> /* All tasks on this runqueue were pinned by CPU affinity
>> */
>> @@ -6686,7 +6684,7 @@ static int load_balance(int this_cpu, struct rq
>> *this_rq,
>> env.loop_break = sched_nr_migrate_break;
>> goto redo;
>> }
>> - goto out_balanced;
>> + goto out_all_pinned;
>> }
>> }
>> @@ -6760,6 +6758,23 @@ static int load_balance(int this_cpu, struct rq
>> *this_rq,
>> goto out;
>> out_balanced:
>> + /*
>> + * We reach balance although we may have faced some affinity
>> + * constraints. Clear the imbalance flag if it was set.
>> + */
>> + if (sd_parent) {
>> + int *group_imbalance = &sd_parent->groups->sgc->imbalance;
>> +
>> + if (*group_imbalance)
>> + *group_imbalance = 0;
>> + }
>> +
>> +out_all_pinned:
>> + /*
>> + * We reach balance because all tasks are pinned at this level so
>> + * we can't migrate them. Let the imbalance flag set so parent
>> level
>> + * can try to migrate them.
>> + */
>> schedstat_inc(sd, lb_balanced[idle]);
>> sd->nr_balance_failed = 0;
>
>
--
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