[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YJ5HQR943rSFsLxw@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2021 11:47:45 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri@...el.com>,
Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>,
"Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...el.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] sched/fair: Consider SMT in ASYM_PACKING load
balance
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 08:49:08AM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote:
> include/linux/sched/topology.h | 1 +
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 102 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/topology.h b/include/linux/sched/topology.h
> index 8f0f778b7c91..43bdb8b1e1df 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/topology.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/topology.h
> @@ -57,6 +57,7 @@ static inline int cpu_numa_flags(void)
> #endif
>
> extern int arch_asym_cpu_priority(int cpu);
> +extern bool arch_asym_check_smt_siblings(void);
>
> struct sched_domain_attr {
> int relax_domain_level;
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index c8b66a5d593e..3d6cc027e6e6 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -106,6 +106,15 @@ int __weak arch_asym_cpu_priority(int cpu)
> return -cpu;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * For asym packing, first check the state of SMT siblings before deciding to
> + * pull tasks.
> + */
> +bool __weak arch_asym_check_smt_siblings(void)
> +{
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * The margin used when comparing utilization with CPU capacity.
> *
> @@ -8458,6 +8550,9 @@ sched_asym(struct lb_env *env, struct sd_lb_stats *sds, struct sg_lb_stats *sgs
> if (group == sds->local)
> return false;
>
> + if (arch_asym_check_smt_siblings())
> + return asym_can_pull_tasks(env->dst_cpu, sds, sgs, group);
> +
> return sched_asym_prefer(env->dst_cpu, group->asym_prefer_cpu);
> }
So I'm thinking that this is a property of having ASYM_PACKING at a core
level, rather than some arch special. Wouldn't something like this be
more appropriate?
---
--- a/include/linux/sched/topology.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched/topology.h
@@ -57,7 +57,6 @@ static inline int cpu_numa_flags(void)
#endif
extern int arch_asym_cpu_priority(int cpu);
-extern bool arch_asym_check_smt_siblings(void);
struct sched_domain_attr {
int relax_domain_level;
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -107,15 +107,6 @@ int __weak arch_asym_cpu_priority(int cp
}
/*
- * For asym packing, first check the state of SMT siblings before deciding to
- * pull tasks.
- */
-bool __weak arch_asym_check_smt_siblings(void)
-{
- return false;
-}
-
-/*
* The margin used when comparing utilization with CPU capacity.
*
* (default: ~20%)
@@ -8550,7 +8541,8 @@ sched_asym(struct lb_env *env, struct sd
if (group == sds->local)
return false;
- if (arch_asym_check_smt_siblings())
+ if ((sds->local->flags & SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY) ||
+ (group->flags & SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY))
return asym_can_pull_tasks(env->dst_cpu, sds, sgs, group);
return sched_asym_prefer(env->dst_cpu, group->asym_prefer_cpu);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists