[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230213194740.GA6164@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 11:47:40 -0800
From: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Cc: "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri@...el.com>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@....com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Tim C . Chen" <tim.c.chen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/10] sched/fair: Do not even the number of busy CPUs
via asym_packing
On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 01:44:20PM +0100, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 07/02/2023 05:58, Ricardo Neri wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > @@ -9269,33 +9264,11 @@ static bool asym_smt_can_pull_tasks(int dst_cpu, struct sd_lb_stats *sds,
> > struct sched_group *sg)
> > {
> > #ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_SMT
> > - bool local_is_smt;
> > int sg_busy_cpus;
> >
> > - local_is_smt = sds->local->flags & SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY;
> > sg_busy_cpus = sgs->group_weight - sgs->idle_cpus;
> >
> > - if (!local_is_smt) {
> > - /*
> > - * If we are here, @dst_cpu is idle and does not have SMT
> > - * siblings. Pull tasks if candidate group has two or more
> > - * busy CPUs.
> > - */
> > - if (sg_busy_cpus >= 2) /* implies sg_is_smt */
> > - return true;
> > -
> > - /*
> > - * @dst_cpu does not have SMT siblings. @sg may have SMT
> > - * siblings and only one is busy. In such case, @dst_cpu
> > - * can help if it has higher priority and is idle (i.e.,
> > - * it has no running tasks).
> > - */
> > - return sched_asym_prefer(dst_cpu, sg->asym_prefer_cpu);
> > - }
> > -
> > /*
> > - * @dst_cpu has SMT siblings and are also idle.
> > - *
> > * If the difference in the number of busy CPUs is two or more, let
> > * find_busiest_group() take care of it. We only care if @sg has
> > * exactly one busy CPU. This covers SMT and non-SMT sched groups.
>
> Can't this be made lighter by removing asym_smt_can_pull_tasks() and
> putting the logic to exclude the call to sched_asym_prefer() into
> sched_asym() directly?
Yes, you are right. asym_smt_can_pull_tasks() was simplified significantly.
I'll take your suggestion.
> Not sure if we need the CONFIG_SCHED_SMT since it's all guarded by
> `flags & SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY` already, which is only set under.
> CONFIG_SCHED_SMT.
Yes, asym_smt_can_pull_tasks() now cares for a very specific case, which
only happens with CONFIG_SCHED_SMT. I'll remove the !CONFIG_SCHED_SMT part.
>
> static inline bool
> sched_asym(struct lb_env *env, struct sd_lb_stats *sds,
> struct sg_lb_stats *sgs, struct sched_group *group)
> {
> bool local_is_smt = sds->local->flags & SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY;
>
> if (local_is_smt && !is_core_idle(env->dst_cpu))
> return false;
>
> if ((local_is_smt || group->flags & SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY)) {
> int sg_busy_cpus = sgs->group_weight - sgs->idle_cpus;
>
> if (sg_busy_cpus != 1)
> return false;
> }
>
> return sched_asym_prefer(env->dst_cpu, group->asym_prefer_cpu);
I'll take your suggestion. Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists