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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2021 17:54:35 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: Josh Don <joshdon@...gle.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, 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>, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>, Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>, Vineeth Pillai <vineethrp@...il.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/core: forced idle accounting On Thu, Oct 07, 2021 at 05:08:25PM -0700, Josh Don wrote: > Adds accounting for "forced idle" time, which is time where a cookie'd > task forces its SMT sibling to idle, despite the presence of runnable > tasks. > > Forced idle time is one means to measure the cost of enabling core > scheduling (ie. the capacity lost due to the need to force idle). It seems an excessive amount of code for what it says to do. > + smt_count = cpumask_weight(smt_mask); That's a fairly expensive operation to find a number that's going the be to same over and over and over... > + if (smt_count > 2) { > + unsigned int nr_forced_idle = 0, nr_running = 0; > + > + for_each_cpu(i, smt_mask) { > + rq_i = cpu_rq(i); > + p = rq_i->core_pick ?: rq_i->curr; > + > + if (p != rq_i->idle) > + nr_running++; > + else if (rq_i->nr_running) > + nr_forced_idle++; > + } > + > + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!nr_running)) { > + /* can't be forced idle without a running task */ > + } else { > + delta *= nr_forced_idle; > + delta /= nr_running; > + } Now the comment sayeth: > + /* > + * For larger SMT configurations, we need to scale the charged > + * forced idle amount since there can be more than one forced idle > + * sibling and more than one running cookied task. > + */ But why? > + } > + > + for_each_cpu(i, smt_mask) { > + rq_i = cpu_rq(i); > + p = rq_i->core_pick ?: rq_i->curr; > + > + if (!p->core_cookie) > + continue; > + > + p->core_forceidle_sum += delta; > + > + /* Optimize for common case. */ > + if (smt_count == 2) > + break; > + } > +}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists