linux-kernel - [tip:sched/urgent] sched/fair: Add comments to explain select_idle

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 21 Mar 2016 04:16:58 -0700
From:	tip-bot for Matt Fleming <tipbot@...or.com>
To:	linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, hpa@...or.com, mgalbraith@...e.de,
	mingo@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mgorman@...e.com,
	matt@...eblueprint.co.uk
Subject: [tip:sched/urgent] sched/fair: Add comments to explain
 select_idle_sibling()

Commit-ID:  d4335581dc30ec6545999c7443bb9fead274a980
Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/d4335581dc30ec6545999c7443bb9fead274a980
Author:     Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
AuthorDate: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 14:59:08 +0000
Committer:  Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CommitDate: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:52:51 +0100

sched/fair: Add comments to explain select_idle_sibling()

It's not entirely obvious how the main loop in select_idle_sibling()
works on first glance. Sprinkle a few comments to explain the design
and intention behind the loop based on some conversations with Mike
and Peter.

Signed-off-by: Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.com>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@...e.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1457535548-15329-1-git-send-email-matt@codeblueprint.co.uk
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
---
 kernel/sched/fair.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 3c114d9..303d639 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -5055,7 +5055,19 @@ static int select_idle_sibling(struct task_struct *p, int target)
 		return i;
 
 	/*
-	 * Otherwise, iterate the domains and find an elegible idle cpu.
+	 * Otherwise, iterate the domains and find an eligible idle cpu.
+	 *
+	 * A completely idle sched group at higher domains is more
+	 * desirable than an idle group at a lower level, because lower
+	 * domains have smaller groups and usually share hardware
+	 * resources which causes tasks to contend on them, e.g. x86
+	 * hyperthread siblings in the lowest domain (SMT) can contend
+	 * on the shared cpu pipeline.
+	 *
+	 * However, while we prefer idle groups at higher domains
+	 * finding an idle cpu at the lowest domain is still better than
+	 * returning 'target', which we've already established, isn't
+	 * idle.
 	 */
 	sd = rcu_dereference(per_cpu(sd_llc, target));
 	for_each_lower_domain(sd) {
@@ -5065,11 +5077,16 @@ static int select_idle_sibling(struct task_struct *p, int target)
 						tsk_cpus_allowed(p)))
 				goto next;
 
+			/* Ensure the entire group is idle */
 			for_each_cpu(i, sched_group_cpus(sg)) {
 				if (i == target || !idle_cpu(i))
 					goto next;
 			}
 
+			/*
+			 * It doesn't matter which cpu we pick, the
+			 * whole group is idle.
+			 */
 			target = cpumask_first_and(sched_group_cpus(sg),
 					tsk_cpus_allowed(p));
 			goto done;