linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] sched/fair: add util

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: <20171215125800.fshczo2tgilmcdtk@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Fri, 15 Dec 2017 13:58:00 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@...roid.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] sched/fair: add util_est on top of PELT

On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 12:03:31PM +0000, Patrick Bellasi wrote:

> So, by moving util_est right after sched_avg, here is what we get (with some
> lines to better highlight 64B boundaries):
> 
>                 const struct sched_class  * sched_class;                                 /*   152     8 */
>                 struct sched_entity {
> 			[...]
> 		---[ Line 9 ]-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                         struct sched_avg {
>                                 /* typedef u64 */ long long unsigned int last_update_time; /*   576     8 */
>                                 /* typedef u64 */ long long unsigned int load_sum;       /*   584     8 */
>                                 /* typedef u64 */ long long unsigned int runnable_load_sum; /*   592     8 */
>                                 /* typedef u32 */ unsigned int util_sum;                 /*   600     4 */
>                                 /* typedef u32 */ unsigned int period_contrib;           /*   604     4 */
>                                 long unsigned int load_avg;                              /*   608     8 */
>                                 long unsigned int runnable_load_avg;                     /*   616     8 */
>                                 long unsigned int util_avg;                              /*   624     8 */
>                         } avg; /*   576    56 */
>                         /* --- cacheline 6 boundary (384 bytes) was 24 bytes ago --- */
>                         struct util_est {
>                                 long unsigned int last;                                  /*   632     8 */
> 		---[ Line 10 ]------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                                 long unsigned int ewma;                                  /*   640     8 */
>                         } util_est; /*   632    16 */
>                 } se; /*   192   512 */
> 		---[ Line 11 ]------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 /* --- cacheline 9 boundary (576 bytes) was 24 bytes ago --- */
>                 struct sched_rt_entity {
>                         struct list_head {
>                                 struct list_head * next;                                 /*   704     8 */
>                                 struct list_head * prev;                                 /*   712     8 */
>                         } run_list; /*   704    16 */
> 
> 
> As you can see we still end up with util_est spanning acrosss two cache and
> even worst with an almost empty Line 10. The point is that sched_avg already
> uses 56B... which leave just 8bytes left.

Yes, that's unfortunate.

> So, I can to move util_est there and use unsigned int for "last" and "ewma"
> storage. This should fix the cache alignment but only until we do not add
> other stuff to sched_avg.
> 
> BTW, should not be possible to use a similar "fasting" approach for load_avg
> and runnable_load_avg? Given their range a u32 should be just good enough,
> isn't it?

Probably, I'd have to page all that stuff back in :/

Another issue is that for tasks load and runnable_load are the exact
same; I just never found a sensible way to collapse that.