From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Swapnil Sapkal <Swapnil.Sapkal@amd.com>,
Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>,
Julien Desfossez <jdesfossez@digitalocean.com>,
x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] sched: Rate limit migrations to 1 per 2ms per task
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 11:46:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0dcef55c-7baf-eadc-0253-d283385cbeb3@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZP1qQjCLubr7J8us@chenyu5-mobl2>
On 9/10/23 03:03, Chen Yu wrote:
> On 2023-09-06 at 09:57:04 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
[...]
>>
>> I suspect we could try something like this then:
>>
>> When a cpu enters idle state, it could grab a sched_clock() timestamp
>> and store it into this_rq()->enter_idle_time. Then, when it exits
>> idle and reenters idle again, it could save rq->enter_idle_time to
>> rq->prev_enter_idle_time, and sample enter_idle_time again.
>>
>> When considering the CPU as a target for task migration, if it is
>> idle but the delta between sched_clock_cpu(cpu_of(rq)) and that
>> prev_enter_idle_time is below a threshold (e.g. a few ms), this means
>> the CPU got out of idle and went back to idle pretty quickly, which
>> means it's not a good target for pulling tasks for a short while.
>>
>
> Do you mean inhit the newidle balance? Currently the newidle balance
> checks if the average idle duration of that rq is below the total cost
> to do a load balance:
> this_rq->avg_idle < sd->max_newidle_lb_cost
Not quite but..
>
>> I'll try something along these lines and see how it goes.
anyway this approach did not work based on my testing.
>>
>
> Consider the sleep time looks like a good idea! What you suggests that
> inspires me that, maybe we could consider the task's sleep duration,
> and decide whether to migrate it or not in the next wakeup.
>
> Say, if a task p sleeps and woken up quickly, can we reserve its previous
> CPU as idle for a short while? So other tasks can not choose p's previous
> CPU during their wakeup. A short while later, when p is woken up, it finds
> that its previous CPU is still idle and chooses that.
>
> I created a draft patch based on that, and it shows some improvements on
> a 224 CPUs system. I'll post the draft patch and Cc you.
I think your approach is very promising, let's keep digging into that
direction.
Thanks,
Mathieu
>
> thanks,
> Chenyu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-13 15:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-05 17:11 [RFC PATCH 0/2] sched/eevdf: Rate limit task migration Mathieu Desnoyers
2023-09-05 17:11 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] sched: Rate limit migrations to 1 per 2ms per task Mathieu Desnoyers
2023-09-05 20:28 ` Tim Chen
2023-09-05 21:16 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2023-09-05 22:44 ` Tim Chen
2023-09-06 9:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-09-06 20:51 ` Tim Chen
2023-09-06 21:55 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2023-09-06 8:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-09-06 13:58 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2023-09-06 8:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-09-06 13:57 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2023-09-06 15:38 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2023-09-10 7:03 ` Chen Yu
2023-09-13 15:46 ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2023-09-05 17:11 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] sched: Implement adaptative rate limiting of task migrations Mathieu Desnoyers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=0dcef55c-7baf-eadc-0253-d283385cbeb3@efficios.com \
--to=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=Swapnil.Sapkal@amd.com \
--cc=aaron.lu@intel.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=jdesfossez@digitalocean.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome