linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v3 06/10] sched: Add over-utilization/tipping point indicator

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: <bdfd313d-1b31-0672-0a23-285087206b06@arm.com>
Date:   Tue, 19 Jun 2018 12:26:35 +0200
From:   Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
To:     Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@...eaurora.org>,
        Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
Cc:     peterz@...radead.org, rjw@...ysocki.net,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        morten.rasmussen@....com, chris.redpath@....com,
        patrick.bellasi@....com, valentin.schneider@....com,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, thara.gopinath@...aro.org,
        viresh.kumar@...aro.org, tkjos@...gle.com, joelaf@...gle.com,
        smuckle@...gle.com, adharmap@...cinc.com, skannan@...cinc.com,
        juri.lelli@...hat.com, edubezval@...il.com,
        srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com, currojerez@...eup.net,
        javi.merino@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 06/10] sched: Add over-utilization/tipping point
 indicator

On 06/19/2018 09:01 AM, Pavan Kondeti wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 03:25:01PM +0100, Quentin Perret wrote:

[...]

>> @@ -8152,6 +8176,9 @@ static inline void update_sg_lb_stats(struct lb_env *env,
>>   		if (nr_running > 1)
>>   			*overload = true;
>>   
>> +		if (cpu_overutilized(i))
>> +			*overutilized = 1;
>> +
> 
> There is no need to check if every CPU is overutilized or not once
> *overutilized is marked as true, right?

True, so you want to check *overutilized before calling 
cpu_overutilized() to save a little bit on compute?

[...]

>> @@ -8586,6 +8621,10 @@ static struct sched_group *find_busiest_group(struct lb_env *env)
>>   	 * this level.
>>   	 */
>>   	update_sd_lb_stats(env, &sds);
>> +
>> +	if (sched_energy_enabled() && !READ_ONCE(env->dst_rq->rd->overutilized))
>> +		goto out_balanced;
>> +
> 
> Is there any reason for sending no-hz idle kicks but bailing out here when
> system is not overutilized?

Even if a system is not-overutilized, we want to update stale cpu 
blocked load and utilization so NOHZ_STATS_KICK have to get through.

So calling find_busiest_group() -> update_sd_lb_stats() -> 
update_sg_lb_stats() to possibly execute update_nohz_stats() is IMHO the 
right thing to do.