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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <09a7a5cb-dde5-122e-a086-5802df993433@amd.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Sep 2023 11:00:02 +0530
From:   K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>
To:     Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@...el.com>
Cc:     Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...el.com>, Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.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>,
        Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
        "Gautham R . Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@....com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: skip the cache hot CPU in
 select_idle_cpu()

Hello Chenyu,

One question ...

On 9/11/2023 8:20 AM, Chen Yu wrote:
> [..snip..]
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index e20f50726ab8..fe3b760c9654 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> [..more snip..]
> @@ -7052,10 +7072,14 @@ static int select_idle_core(struct task_struct *p, int core, struct cpumask *cpu
>  	int cpu;
>  
>  	for_each_cpu(cpu, cpu_smt_mask(core)) {
> -		if (!available_idle_cpu(cpu)) {
> +		bool cache_hot = sched_feat(SIS_CACHE) ?
> +			sched_clock_cpu(cpu) < cpu_rq(cpu)->cache_hot_timeout : false;
> +
> +		if (!available_idle_cpu(cpu) || cache_hot) {
>  			idle = false;
>  			if (*idle_cpu == -1) {
> -				if (sched_idle_cpu(cpu) && cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, p->cpus_ptr)) {
> +				if (sched_idle_cpu(cpu) && cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, p->cpus_ptr) &&
> +				    !cache_hot) {

Here, the CPU is running a SCHED_IDLE task ...

>  					*idle_cpu = cpu;
>  					break;
>  				}

... but just below this, there are following lines to cache the idle_cpu:

		}
		if (*idle_cpu == -1 && cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, p->cpus_ptr))
			*idle_cpu = cpu;

Would it make sense to also add the same "cache_hot" check here when we
come across an idle CPU during the search for an idle core? Something
like:

-		if (*idle_cpu == -1 && cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, p->cpus_ptr))
+		if (*idle_cpu == -1 && !cache_hot && cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, p->cpus_ptr))
			*idle_cpu = cpu;

Implications with the above change:

If the entire core is idle, "select_idle_core()" will return the core
and the search will bail out in "select_idle_cpu()". Otherwise, the
cache-hot idle CPUs encountered during the search for idle core will be
ignored now and if "idle_cpu" is not -1, it contains an idle CPU that is
not cache-hot.

Thoughts?

> [..snip..]

--
Thanks and Regards,
Prateek

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ