[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e23d04d3-723e-5733-a43a-601f58ecfee4@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 13:53:38 -0700
From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)" <song.bao.hua@...ilicon.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: "catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
"rjw@...ysocki.net" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"vincent.guittot@...aro.org" <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"lenb@...nel.org" <lenb@...nel.org>,
"dietmar.eggemann@....com" <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
"rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"bsegall@...gle.com" <bsegall@...gle.com>,
"mgorman@...e.de" <mgorman@...e.de>,
"msys.mizuma@...il.com" <msys.mizuma@...il.com>,
"valentin.schneider@....com" <valentin.schneider@....com>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>,
"juri.lelli@...hat.com" <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"sudeep.holla@....com" <sudeep.holla@....com>,
"aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com" <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "xuwei (O)" <xuwei5@...wei.com>,
"Zengtao (B)" <prime.zeng@...ilicon.com>,
"guodong.xu@...aro.org" <guodong.xu@...aro.org>,
yangyicong <yangyicong@...wei.com>,
"Liguozhu (Kenneth)" <liguozhu@...ilicon.com>,
"linuxarm@...neuler.org" <linuxarm@...neuler.org>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [Linuxarm] Re: [RFC PATCH v4 3/3] scheduler: Add cluster
scheduler level for x86
> It seems sensible the more CPU we get in the cluster, the more
> we need the kernel to be aware of its existence.
>
> Tim, it is possible for you to bring up the cpu_cluster_mask and
> cluster_sibling for x86 so that the topology can be represented
> in sysfs and be used by scheduler? It seems your patch lacks this
> part.
You mean having something in /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/topology
on cluster information so that an external program can
affinitize to a cluster if it prefers to do so?
Tim
>
> BTW, I wonder if x86 can do some improvement on your KMP_AFFINITY
> by leveraging the cluster topology level.
> https://software.intel.com/content/www/us/en/develop/documentation/cpp-compiler-developer-guide-and-reference/top/optimization-and-programming-guide/openmp-support/openmp-library-support/thread-affinity-interface-linux-and-windows.html
>
> KMP_AFFINITY has thread affinity modes like compact and scatter,
> it seems this "compact" and "scatter" can also use the cluster
> information as you see we are also struggling with the "compact"
> and "scatter" issues here in this patchset :-)
>
> Thanks
> Barry
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists