linux-kernel - [PATCH] sched/fair: Make sched-idle cpu selection consistent throughout

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <5eba2fb4af9ebc7396101bb9bd6c8aa9c8af0710.1571899508.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Date:   Thu, 24 Oct 2019 12:15:27 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Cc:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] sched/fair: Make sched-idle cpu selection consistent throughout

There are instances where we keep searching for an idle CPU despite
having a sched-idle cpu already (in find_idlest_group_cpu(),
select_idle_smt() and select_idle_cpu() and then there are places where
we don't necessarily do that and return a sched-idle cpu as soon as we
find one (in select_idle_sibling()). This looks a bit inconsistent and
it may be worth having the same policy everywhere.

On the other hand, choosing a sched-idle cpu over a idle one shall be
beneficial from performance point of view as well, as we don't need to
get the cpu online from a deep idle state which is quite a time
consuming process and delays the scheduling of the newly wakeup task.

This patch tries to simplify code around sched-idle cpu selection and
make it consistent throughout.

FWIW, tests were done with the help of rt-app (8 SCHED_OTHER and 5
SCHED_IDLE tasks, not bound to any cpu) on ARM platform (octa-core), and
no significant difference in scheduling latency of SCHED_OTHER tasks was
found.

Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
---
 kernel/sched/fair.c | 34 ++++++++++++----------------------
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index a81c36472822..bb367f48c1ef 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -5545,7 +5545,7 @@ find_idlest_group_cpu(struct sched_group *group, struct task_struct *p, int this
 	unsigned int min_exit_latency = UINT_MAX;
 	u64 latest_idle_timestamp = 0;
 	int least_loaded_cpu = this_cpu;
-	int shallowest_idle_cpu = -1, si_cpu = -1;
+	int shallowest_idle_cpu = -1;
 	int i;
 
 	/* Check if we have any choice: */
@@ -5554,6 +5554,9 @@ find_idlest_group_cpu(struct sched_group *group, struct task_struct *p, int this
 
 	/* Traverse only the allowed CPUs */
 	for_each_cpu_and(i, sched_group_span(group), p->cpus_ptr) {
+		if (sched_idle_cpu(i))
+			return i;
+
 		if (available_idle_cpu(i)) {
 			struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(i);
 			struct cpuidle_state *idle = idle_get_state(rq);
@@ -5576,12 +5579,7 @@ find_idlest_group_cpu(struct sched_group *group, struct task_struct *p, int this
 				latest_idle_timestamp = rq->idle_stamp;
 				shallowest_idle_cpu = i;
 			}
-		} else if (shallowest_idle_cpu == -1 && si_cpu == -1) {
-			if (sched_idle_cpu(i)) {
-				si_cpu = i;
-				continue;
-			}
-
+		} else if (shallowest_idle_cpu == -1) {
 			load = cpu_load(cpu_rq(i));
 			if (load < min_load) {
 				min_load = load;
@@ -5590,11 +5588,7 @@ find_idlest_group_cpu(struct sched_group *group, struct task_struct *p, int this
 		}
 	}
 
-	if (shallowest_idle_cpu != -1)
-		return shallowest_idle_cpu;
-	if (si_cpu != -1)
-		return si_cpu;
-	return least_loaded_cpu;
+	return shallowest_idle_cpu != -1 ? shallowest_idle_cpu : least_loaded_cpu;
 }
 
 static inline int find_idlest_cpu(struct sched_domain *sd, struct task_struct *p,
@@ -5747,7 +5741,7 @@ static int select_idle_core(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int
  */
 static int select_idle_smt(struct task_struct *p, int target)
 {
-	int cpu, si_cpu = -1;
+	int cpu;
 
 	if (!static_branch_likely(&sched_smt_present))
 		return -1;
@@ -5755,13 +5749,11 @@ static int select_idle_smt(struct task_struct *p, int target)
 	for_each_cpu(cpu, cpu_smt_mask(target)) {
 		if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, p->cpus_ptr))
 			continue;
-		if (available_idle_cpu(cpu))
+		if (available_idle_cpu(cpu) || sched_idle_cpu(cpu))
 			return cpu;
-		if (si_cpu == -1 && sched_idle_cpu(cpu))
-			si_cpu = cpu;
 	}
 
-	return si_cpu;
+	return -1;
 }
 
 #else /* CONFIG_SCHED_SMT */
@@ -5790,7 +5782,7 @@ static int select_idle_cpu(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int t
 	u64 time, cost;
 	s64 delta;
 	int this = smp_processor_id();
-	int cpu, nr = INT_MAX, si_cpu = -1;
+	int cpu, nr = INT_MAX;
 
 	this_sd = rcu_dereference(*this_cpu_ptr(&sd_llc));
 	if (!this_sd)
@@ -5818,13 +5810,11 @@ static int select_idle_cpu(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int t
 
 	for_each_cpu_wrap(cpu, sched_domain_span(sd), target) {
 		if (!--nr)
-			return si_cpu;
+			return -1;
 		if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, p->cpus_ptr))
 			continue;
-		if (available_idle_cpu(cpu))
+		if (available_idle_cpu(cpu) || sched_idle_cpu(cpu))
 			break;
-		if (si_cpu == -1 && sched_idle_cpu(cpu))
-			si_cpu = cpu;
 	}
 
 	time = cpu_clock(this) - time;
-- 
2.21.0.rc0.269.g1a574e7a288b