mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
To: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>, Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>,
	Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>,
	K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
	Yicong Yang <yangyicong@hisilicon.com>,
	"Gautham R . Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
	Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
	Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
	Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>,
	Honglei Wang <wanghonglei@didichuxing.com>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Chen Yu <yu.chen.surf@gmail.com>,
	Tianchen Ding <dtcccc@linux.alibaba.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
	Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/2] sched/fair: Introduce short duration task check
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2023 12:28:26 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1913041e-ee67-1e65-68fa-ef08b97ed9d5@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y7fdEruJGTux4fYH@chenyu5-mobl1>

On 06/01/2023 09:34, Chen Yu wrote:
> Hi Dietmar,
> thanks for reviewing the patch!
> On 2023-01-05 at 12:33:16 +0100, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
>> On 16/12/2022 07:11, Chen Yu wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> @@ -5995,6 +6005,18 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
>>>  
>>>  static void set_next_buddy(struct sched_entity *se);
>>>  
>>> +static inline void dur_avg_update(struct task_struct *p, bool task_sleep)
>>> +{
>>> +	u64 dur;
>>> +
>>> +	if (!task_sleep)
>>> +		return;
>>> +
>>> +	dur = p->se.sum_exec_runtime - p->se.prev_sum_exec_runtime_vol;
>>> +	p->se.prev_sum_exec_runtime_vol = p->se.sum_exec_runtime;
>>
>> Shouldn't se->prev_sum_exec_runtime_vol be set in enqueue_task_fair()
>> and not in dequeue_task_fair()->dur_avg_update()? Otherwise `dur` will
>> contain sleep time.
>>
> After the task p is dequeued, p's sum_exec_runtime will not be increased.

True.

> Unless task p is switched in again, p's sum_exec_runtime will continue to
> increase. So dur should not include the sleep time, because we substract

Not sure I get this sentence? p's se->sum_exec_runtime will only
increase if p is current, so running?

> between the sum_exec_runtime rather than rq->clock_task. Not sure if I understand
> this correctly?

No, you're right. We're not dealing with time snapshots but rather with
sum_exec_runtime snapshots. So the value will not change between dequeue
and the next enqueue.

e ... enqueue_task_fair()
d ... dequeue_task_fair()
s ... set_next_entity()
p ... put_prev_entity()
u ... update_curr_fair()->update_curr()

p1:

---|---||--|--|---|--|--||---
   d   es  u  p   s  u  pd

   ^   ^
   |   |
  (A) (B)

Same se->prev_sum_exec_runtime_vol value in (A) and (B).

> My original thought was that, record the average run time of every section:
> Only consider that task voluntarily relinquishes the CPU.
> For example, suppose on CPU1, task p1 and p2 run alternatively:
> 
>  --------------------> time
> 
>  | p1 runs 1ms | p2 preempt p1 | p1 switch in, runs 0.5ms and blocks |
>                ^               ^                                     ^
>  |_____________|               |_____________________________________|
>                                                                      ^
>                                                                      |
>                                                                   p1 dequeued
> 
> p1's duration in one section is (1 + 0.5)ms. Because if p2 does not
> preempt p1, p1 can run 1.5ms. This reflects the nature of a task,
> how long it wishes to run at most.
> 
>> Like we do for se->prev_sum_exec_runtime in set_next_entity() but for
>> one `set_next_entity()-put_prev_entity()` run section.
>>
>> AFAICS, you want to measure the exec_runtime sum over all run sections
>> between enqueue and dequeue.
> Yes, we tried to record the 'decayed' average exec_runtime for each section.
> Say, task p runs for a ms , then p is dequeued and blocks for b ms, and then
> runs for c ms, its average duration is 0.875 * a + 0.125 * c , which is
> what update_avg() does.

OK.


  reply	other threads:[~2023-01-06 11:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-12-16  6:08 [RFC PATCH v4 0/2] sched/fair: Choose the CPU where short task is running during wake up Chen Yu
2022-12-16  6:11 ` [RFC PATCH v4 1/2] sched/fair: Introduce short duration task check Chen Yu
2023-01-05 11:33   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-01-06  8:34     ` Chen Yu
2023-01-06 11:28       ` Dietmar Eggemann [this message]
2023-01-06 14:29         ` Chen Yu
2023-01-16 10:33     ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-01-18 17:48       ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-01-19 14:29       ` Chen Yu
2022-12-16  6:11 ` [RFC PATCH v4 2/2] sched/fair: Choose the CPU where short task is running during wake up Chen Yu
2022-12-29  7:16 ` [RFC PATCH v4 0/2] " K Prateek Nayak
2022-12-30  2:47   ` Chen Yu
2023-01-16 10:53     ` K Prateek Nayak
2023-01-19 14:58       ` Chen Yu
2023-01-17  2:53 ` Yicong Yang
2023-01-19 16:11   ` Chen Yu
2023-01-20  9:09     ` Yicong Yang
2023-01-22 15:37       ` Chen Yu
2023-01-23  4:47         ` K Prateek Nayak

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=1913041e-ee67-1e65-68fa-ef08b97ed9d5@arm.com \
    --to=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=aaron.lu@intel.com \
    --cc=bristot@redhat.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=dtcccc@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
    --cc=hdanton@sina.com \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=joshdon@google.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --cc=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=riel@surriel.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
    --cc=wanghonglei@didichuxing.com \
    --cc=wuyun.abel@bytedance.com \
    --cc=yangyicong@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=yu.chen.surf@gmail.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®