[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <95c4ad1bdc6bed0278329994bb4f6a9203f0e1c3.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 01 May 2023 11:30:21 -0700
From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: 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>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....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>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@....com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/12] sched: Avoid unnecessary migrations within SMT
domains
On Sat, 2023-04-29 at 17:32 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 01:31:36PM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This is v4 of this series. Previous versions can be found here [1], [2],
> > and here [3]. To avoid duplication, I do not include the cover letter of
> > the original submission. You can read it in [1].
> >
> > This patchset applies cleanly on today's master branch of the tip tree.
> >
> > Changes since v3:
> >
> > Nobody liked the proposed changes to the setting of prefer_sibling.
> > Instead, I tweaked the solution that Dietmar proposed. Now the busiest
> > group, not the local group, determines the setting of prefer_sibling.
> >
> > Vincent suggested improvements to the logic to decide whether to follow
> > asym_packing priorities. Peter suggested to wrap that in a helper function.
> > I added sched_use_asym_prio().
> >
> > Ionela found that removing SD_ASYM_PACKING from the SMT domain in x86
> > rendered sd_asym_packing NULL in SMT cores. Now highest_flag_domain()
> > does not assume that all child domains have the requested flag.
> >
> > Tim found that asym_active_balance() needs to also check for the idle
> > states of the SMT siblings of lb_env::dst_cpu. I added such check.
> >
> > I wrongly assumed that asym_packing could only be used when the busiest
> > group had exactly one busy CPU. This broke asym_packing balancing at the
> > DIE domain. I limited this check to balances between cores at the MC
> > level.
> >
> > As per suggestion from Dietmar, I removed sched_asym_smt_can_pull_tasks()
> > and placed its logic in sched_asym(). Also, sched_asym() uses
> > sched_smt_active() to skip checks when not needed.
> >
> > I also added a patch from Chen Yu to enable asym_packing balancing in
> > Meteor Lake, which has CPUs of different maximum frequency in more than
> > one die.
>
> Is the actual topology of Meteor Lake already public? This patch made me
> wonder if we need SCHED_CLUSTER topology in the hybrid_topology thing,
> but I can't remember (one of the raisins why the endless calls are such
> a frigging waste of time) and I can't seem to find the answer using
> Google either.
There are a bunch of fixes that are needed for SCHED_CLUSTER to work
properly on hybrid_topology. I'll clean them up and post them on
top of Ricardo's current patch set this week.
Tim
>
> > Hopefully, these patches are in sufficiently good shape to be merged?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists