[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKfTPtCSc+ym8FTFtSeF4foUqTbsDSr1fJ1j_+j+Zmo=XOUcLA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 18:43:20 +0100
From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
To: Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Morten Rasmussen <Morten.Rasmussen@....com>,
Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>,
Parth Shah <parth@...ux.ibm.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/11] sched/fair: rework find_idlest_group
On Wed, 20 Nov 2019 at 18:34, Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@....com> wrote:
>
> On 11/20/19 17:53, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Nov 2019 at 14:21, Vincent Guittot
> > <vincent.guittot@...aro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Qais,
> > >
> > > On Wed, 20 Nov 2019 at 12:58, Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@....com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Vincent
> > > >
> > > > On 10/18/19 15:26, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > > > The slow wake up path computes per sched_group statisics to select the
> > > > > idlest group, which is quite similar to what load_balance() is doing
> > > > > for selecting busiest group. Rework find_idlest_group() to classify the
> > > > > sched_group and select the idlest one following the same steps as
> > > > > load_balance().
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
> > > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > LTP test has caught a regression in perf_event_open02 test on linux-next and I
> > > > bisected it to this patch.
> > > >
> > > > That is checking out next-20191119 tag and reverting this patch on top the test
> > > > passes. Without the revert the test fails.
> >
> > I haven't tried linux-next yet but LTP test is passed with
> > tip/sched/core, which includes this patch, on hikey960 which is arm64
> > too.
> >
> > Have you tried tip/sched/core on your juno ? this could help to
> > understand if it's only for juno or if this patch interact with
> > another branch merged in linux next
>
> Okay will give it a go. But out of curiosity, what is the output of your run?
>
> While bisecting on linux-next I noticed that at some point the test was
> passing but all the read values were 0. At some point I started seeing
> none-zero values.
for tip/sched/core
linaro@...aro-developer:~/ltp/testcases/kernel/syscalls/perf_event_open$
sudo ./perf_event_open02
perf_event_open02 0 TINFO : overall task clock: 63724479
perf_event_open02 0 TINFO : hw sum: 1800900992, task clock sum: 382170311
perf_event_open02 0 TINFO : ratio: 5.997229
perf_event_open02 1 TPASS : test passed
for next-2019119
~/ltp/testcases/kernel/syscalls/perf_event_open$ sudo ./perf_event_open02 -v
at iteration:0 value:0 time_enabled:69795312 time_running:0
perf_event_open02 0 TINFO : overall task clock: 63582292
perf_event_open02 0 TINFO : hw sum: 0, task clock sum: 0
hw counters: 0 0 0 0
task clock counters: 0 0 0 0
perf_event_open02 0 TINFO : ratio: 0.000000
perf_event_open02 1 TPASS : test passed
>
> --
> Qais Yousef
Powered by blists - more mailing lists