[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <de2d2824-d66e-8852-d67a-d58b478b74c1@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2018 16:42:11 +0000
From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
To: Steve Sistare <steven.sistare@...cle.com>, mingo@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org
Cc: subhra.mazumdar@...cle.com, dhaval.giani@...cle.com,
daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com, pavel.tatashin@...rosoft.com,
matt@...eblueprint.co.uk, umgwanakikbuti@...il.com,
riel@...hat.com, jbacik@...com, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, quentin.perret@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/10] sched/topology: Provide cfs_overload_cpus bitmap
Hi Steve,
On 09/11/2018 12:50, Steve Sistare wrote:
> From: Steve Sistare <steve.sistare@...cle.com>
>
> Define and initialize a sparse bitmap of overloaded CPUs, per
> last-level-cache scheduling domain, for use by the CFS scheduling class.
> Save a pointer to cfs_overload_cpus in the rq for efficient access.
>
> Signed-off-by: Steve Sistare <steven.sistare@...cle.com>
> ---
> include/linux/sched/topology.h | 1 +
> kernel/sched/sched.h | 2 ++
> kernel/sched/topology.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++--
> 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/topology.h b/include/linux/sched/topology.h
> index 6b99761..b173a77 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/topology.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/topology.h
> @@ -72,6 +72,7 @@ struct sched_domain_shared {
> atomic_t ref;
> atomic_t nr_busy_cpus;
> int has_idle_cores;
> + struct sparsemask *cfs_overload_cpus;
Thinking about misfit stealing, we can't use the sd_llc_shared's because
on big.LITTLE misfit migrations happen across LLC domains.
I was thinking of adding a misfit sparsemask to the root_domain, but
then I thought we could do the same thing for cfs_overload_cpus.
By doing so we'd have a single source of information for overloaded CPUs,
and we could filter that down during idle balance - you mentioned earlier
wanting to try stealing at each SD level. This would also let you get
rid of [PATCH 02].
The main part of try_steal() could then be written down as something like
this:
----->8-----
for_each_domain(this_cpu, sd) {
span = sched_domain_span(sd)
for_each_sparse_wrap(src_cpu, overload_cpus) {
if (cpumask_test_cpu(src_cpu, span) &&
steal_from(dts_rq, dst_rf, &locked, src_cpu)) {
stolen = 1;
goto out;
}
}
}
------8<-----
We could limit the stealing to stop at the highest SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES
domain for now so there would be no behavioural change - but we'd
factorize the #ifdef SCHED_SMT bit. Furthermore, the door would be open
to further stealing.
What do you think?
[...]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists