linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 00/10] Optimize sched avgs computation and implement flat util hierarchy

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20160823190910.GE3273@intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 Aug 2016 03:09:10 +0800
From:   Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Benjamin Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
        Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/10] Optimize sched avgs computation and implement
 flat util hierarchy

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 04:13:41PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 03:28:19PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > I still wonder if using a flat util hierarchy is the right solution to
> > solve this problem with utilization and task group. I have noticed
> > exact same issues with load that generates weird task placement
> > decision and i think that we should probably try to solve both wrong
> > behavior with same mechanism. but this is not possible with flat
> > hierarchy for load
> > 
> > Let me take an example.
> > TA is a always running task on CPU1 in group /root/level1/
> > TB wakes up on CPU0 and moves TA into group /root/level2/
> > Even if TA stays on CPU1, runnable_load_avg of CPU1 root cfs rq will become 0.
> 
> Because while we migrate the load_avg on /root/level2, we do not
> propagate the load_avg up the hierarchy?
> 
> And always propagating everyrthing up will indeed also fix the
> utilization issue.

Yes, but for util it's actually irrespective to the number of
hirarchical levels, just propagating directly to the top cfs_rq
or simply rq will do. In other words, it's flat :)
 
> Of course, doing that propagation has its costs..
> 
> Didn't you post a patch doing just this a while ago?