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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 15 Oct 2021 20:29:50 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        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>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] sched/fair: Wait before decaying
 max_newidle_lb_cost

On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 08:02:01PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Oct 2021 at 19:41, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 02:46:53PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > Decay max_newidle_lb_cost only when it has not been updated for a while
> > > and ensure to not decay a recently changed value.
> >
> > I was more thinking something long these lines; ofcourse, no idea how
> > well it actually behaves.
> >
> > Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/sched/topology.h
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/sched/topology.h
> > +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/sched/topology.h
> > @@ -98,7 +98,6 @@ struct sched_domain {
> >
> >         /* idle_balance() stats */
> >         u64 max_newidle_lb_cost;
> > -       unsigned long next_decay_max_lb_cost;
> >
> >         u64 avg_scan_cost;              /* select_idle_sibling */
> >
> > Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > +++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > @@ -10241,6 +10241,17 @@ void update_max_interval(void)
> >  }
> >
> >  /*
> > + * Asymmetric IIR filter, 1/4th down, 3/4th up.
> > + */
> > +static void update_newidle_cost(u64 *cost, u64 new)
> > +{
> > +       s64 diff = new - *cost;
> > +       if (diff > 0)
> > +               diff *= 3;
> > +       *cost += diff / 4;
> > +}
> 
> I tried to use something similar which was based on update_avg() but
> there were some performance regressions:
> some regressions were linked to not jumping to the new max directly. I
> assume some level were started whereas it would take too much time
> and some regressions happened  if the decay was too quick

Hmm, fair enough..

There's always something like:

       s64 diff = new - *cost;
       if (diff < 0)
               diff = 3*diff/256;
       *cost += diff;

Which jumps up instantly and decays rather slower. The advantage of
something like that, as I see it, is all those lines it deletes, but if
it doesn't actually work, it doesn't work.

A well. Thanks for trying.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists