linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 07/11] sched/fair: evenly spread tasks when not overloaded

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: <20191030160356.GM3016@techsingularity.net>
Date:   Wed, 30 Oct 2019 16:03:56 +0000
From:   Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
To:     Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        peterz@...radead.org, pauld@...hat.com, valentin.schneider@....com,
        srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, quentin.perret@....com,
        dietmar.eggemann@....com, Morten.Rasmussen@....com,
        hdanton@...a.com, parth@...ux.ibm.com, riel@...riel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/11] sched/fair: evenly spread tasks when not
 overloaded

On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 03:26:34PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> When there is only 1 cpu per group, using the idle cpus to evenly spread
> tasks doesn't make sense and nr_running is a better metrics.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/fair.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 9ac2264..9b8e20d 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -8601,18 +8601,34 @@ static struct sched_group *find_busiest_group(struct lb_env *env)
>  	    busiest->sum_nr_running > local->sum_nr_running + 1)
>  		goto force_balance;
>  
> -	if (busiest->group_type != group_overloaded &&
> -	     (env->idle == CPU_NOT_IDLE ||
> -	      local->idle_cpus <= (busiest->idle_cpus + 1)))
> -		/*
> -		 * If the busiest group is not overloaded
> -		 * and there is no imbalance between this and busiest group
> -		 * wrt idle CPUs, it is balanced. The imbalance
> -		 * becomes significant if the diff is greater than 1 otherwise
> -		 * we might end up to just move the imbalance on another
> -		 * group.
> -		 */
> -		goto out_balanced;
> +	if (busiest->group_type != group_overloaded) {
> +		if (env->idle == CPU_NOT_IDLE)
> +			/*
> +			 * If the busiest group is not overloaded (and as a
> +			 * result the local one too) but this cpu is already
> +			 * busy, let another idle cpu try to pull task.
> +			 */
> +			goto out_balanced;
> +
> +		if (busiest->group_weight > 1 &&
> +		    local->idle_cpus <= (busiest->idle_cpus + 1))
> +			/*
> +			 * If the busiest group is not overloaded
> +			 * and there is no imbalance between this and busiest
> +			 * group wrt idle CPUs, it is balanced. The imbalance
> +			 * becomes significant if the diff is greater than 1
> +			 * otherwise we might end up to just move the imbalance
> +			 * on another group. Of course this applies only if
> +			 * there is more than 1 CPU per group.
> +			 */
> +			goto out_balanced;
> +
> +		if (busiest->sum_h_nr_running == 1)
> +			/*
> +			 * busiest doesn't have any tasks waiting to run
> +			 */
> +			goto out_balanced;
> +	}
>  

While outside the scope of this patch, it appears that this would still
allow slight imbalances in idle CPUs to pull tasks across NUMA domains
too easily.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs