From: Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@amd.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Gautham Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>,
"svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/15] sched: Pass unlimited __cpu_power information to upper domain level groups
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:51:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090825085124.GF20811@alberich.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1251127297.7538.291.camel@twins>
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 05:21:37PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-08-20 at 15:41 +0200, Andreas Herrmann wrote:
> > For performance reasons __cpu_power in a sched_group might be limited
> > such that the group can handle only one task. To correctly calculate
> > the capacity in upper domain level groups the unlimited power
> > information is required. This patch stores unlimited __cpu_power
> > information in sched_groups.orig_power and uses this when calculating
> > __cpu_power in upper domain level groups.
>
> OK, so this tries to fix the cpu_power wreckage?
Not completely. Just (partially) for my MN domain needs.
> ok, so let me try this with an example:
>
> Suppose we have a dual-core with shared cache and SMT
>
> 0-3 MC
> 0-1 2-3 SMT
>
> Then both levels fancy setting SHARED_RESOURCES and both levels end up
> normalizing the cpu_power to 1, so when we unplug cpu 2, load-balancing
> gets all screwy because the whole system doesn't get normalized
> properly.
So normalization is broken already, right?
In case of sched_smt_power_savings we have 1024 as __cpu_power for
each SMT sched_group. And at MC level we have always 2048 as long as
we have two sched_groups in the SMT level.
> What you propose here is every time we muck with cpu_power we keep the
> real stuff in orig_power and use that to compute the level above.
Yes.
> Except you don't use it in the load-balancer proper, so normalization is
> still hosed.
Yes, the normalization problem that you've mentioned is not fixed by that.
But it might be advisable to fix it.
> Its a creative solution, but I'd rather see cpu_power returned to a
> straight sum of actual power to normalize the inter-cpu runqueue weights
> and do the placement decision using something else.
This means not to artificially restrict __cpu_power to 1024 for performance
scheduling?
Seconded.
But I don't have an impromptu patch for this. ;-(
Regards,
Andreas
--
Operating | Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
System | Karl-Hammerschmidt-Str. 34, 85609 Dornach b. München, Germany
Research | Geschäftsführer: Thomas M. McCoy, Giuliano Meroni
Center | Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis München
(OSRC) | Registergericht München, HRB Nr. 43632
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-25 8:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-20 13:12 [RFC][PATCH 0/15] sched: Fix scheduling for multi-node processors Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-20 13:15 ` [PATCH 1/15] x86, sched: Add config option for multi-node CPU scheduling Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-21 13:50 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2009-08-24 8:49 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-20 13:34 ` [PATCH 2/15] sched, x86: Provide initializer for MN scheduling domain, define MN level Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-20 13:34 ` [PATCH 3/15] sched: Add cpumask to be used when building MN domain Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-20 13:35 ` [PATCH 4/15] sched: Define per CPU variables and cpu_to_group function for " Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-20 13:36 ` [PATCH 5/15] sched: Add function to build MN sched domain Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-20 13:37 ` [PATCH 6/15] sched: Add support for MN domain in build_sched_groups Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-20 13:38 ` [PATCH 7/15] sched: Activate build of MN domains Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-20 13:39 ` [PATCH 8/15] sched: Add parameter sched_mn_power_savings to control MN domain sched policy Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-24 14:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-24 15:32 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-08-24 15:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-25 7:52 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-25 7:50 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-25 6:24 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-25 6:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-25 8:38 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-26 9:30 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2009-08-27 12:47 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-20 13:40 ` [PATCH 9/15] sched: Check sched_mn_power_savings when setting flags for CPU and MN domains Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-24 14:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-25 9:34 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2009-08-26 10:01 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2009-08-20 13:41 ` [PATCH 10/15] sched: Check for sched_mn_power_savings when doing load balancing Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-24 15:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-24 15:40 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-08-25 8:00 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-20 13:41 ` [PATCH 11/15] sched: Pass unlimited __cpu_power information to upper domain level groups Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-24 15:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-24 16:44 ` Balbir Singh
2009-08-24 17:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-24 18:19 ` Balbir Singh
2009-08-25 7:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-25 8:04 ` Balbir Singh
2009-08-25 8:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-25 8:51 ` Andreas Herrmann [this message]
2009-08-20 13:42 ` [PATCH 12/15] sched: Allow NODE domain to be parent of MC instead of CPU domain Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-24 15:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-25 8:55 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-20 13:43 ` [PATCH 13/15] sched: Detect child domain of NUMA (aka NODE) domain Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-24 15:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-25 9:13 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-20 13:45 ` [PATCH 14/15] sched: Conditionally limit __cpu_power when child sched domain has type NODE Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-24 15:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-25 9:19 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-20 13:46 ` [PATCH 15/15] x86: Fix cpu_coregroup_mask to return correct cpumask on multi-node processors Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-24 15:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-24 18:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-08-25 10:13 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-25 10:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-08-27 13:18 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-25 9:31 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-25 9:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-25 10:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-08-25 10:24 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-25 10:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-08-25 10:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-27 15:42 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-27 15:25 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-28 10:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-28 12:03 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-08-28 12:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20090825085124.GF20811@alberich.amd.com \
--to=andreas.herrmann3@amd.com \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.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