[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5510674D.7050202@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 19:19:41 +0000
From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <Morten.Rasmussen@....com>
CC: "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"vincent.guittot@...aro.org" <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
"yuyang.du@...el.com" <yuyang.du@...el.com>,
"preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"mturquette@...aro.org" <mturquette@...aro.org>,
"nico@...aro.org" <nico@...aro.org>,
"rjw@...ysocki.net" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@....com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFCv3 PATCH 12/48] sched: Make usage tracking cpu scale-invariant
On 23/03/15 14:46, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 06:30:49PM +0000, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
>> From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
>>
>> Besides the existing frequency scale-invariance correction factor, apply
>> cpu scale-invariance correction factor to usage tracking.
>>
>> Cpu scale-invariance takes cpu performance deviations due to
>> micro-architectural differences (i.e. instructions per seconds) between
>> cpus in HMP systems (e.g. big.LITTLE) and differences in the frequency
>> value of the highest OPP between cpus in SMP systems into consideration.
>>
>> Each segment of the sched_avg::running_avg_sum geometric series is now
>> scaled by the cpu performance factor too so the
>> sched_avg::utilization_avg_contrib of each entity will be invariant from
>> the particular cpu of the HMP/SMP system it is gathered on.
>>
>> So the usage level that is returned by get_cpu_usage stays relative to
>> the max cpu performance of the system.
>
>> @@ -2547,6 +2549,10 @@ static __always_inline int __update_entity_runnable_avg(u64 now, int cpu,
>>
>> if (runnable)
>> sa->runnable_avg_sum += scaled_delta_w;
>> +
>> + scaled_delta_w *= scale_cpu;
>> + scaled_delta_w >>= SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT;
>> +
>> if (running)
>> sa->running_avg_sum += scaled_delta_w;
>> sa->avg_period += delta_w;
>
> Maybe help remind me why we want this asymmetry between runnable and
> running in terms of scaling?
In the previous patch-set https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/12/2/332 we
cpu-scaled both (sched_avg::runnable_avg_sum (load) and
sched_avg::running_avg_sum (utilization)) but during the review Vincent
pointed out that a cpu-scaled invariant load signal messes up
load-balancing based on s[dg]_lb_stats::avg_load in overload scenarios.
avg_load = load/capacity and load can't be simply replaced here by
'cpu-scale invariant load' (which is load*capacity).
> The above talks about why we want running scaled with the cpu metric,
> but it forgets to tell me why we do not want to scale runnable.
Yes, I will add the missing explanation to this patch.
> (even if I were to have a vague recollection it seems like a good thing
> to write down someplace ;-).
Definitely true.
Back in December last year we talked about adding the now missing
cpu-scale invariant load signal to the end (which should contain more
experimental bits) of the patch-set. I guess we haven't done this simply
because of the missing modifications around s[dg]_lb_stats::avg_load
which would be then needed.
--
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