From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Skip double execution of pick_next_task_fair
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 12:00:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140424100047.GP11096@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1398292317.2970.63.camel@schen9-DESK>
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 03:31:57PM -0700, Tim Chen wrote:
> The current code will call pick_next_task_fair a second time
> in the slow path if we did not pull any task in our first try.
> This is really unnecessary as we already know no task can
> be pulled and it doubles the delay for the cpu to enter idle.
>
> We instrumented some network workloads and that saw that
> pick_next_task_fair is frequently called twice before a cpu enters idle.
> The call to pick_next_task_fair can add
> non trivial latency as it calls load_balance which runs find_busiest_group
> on an hierarchy of sched domains spanning the cpus for a large system. For
> some 4 socket systems, we saw almost 0.25 msec spent per call
> of pick_next_task_fair before a cpu can be idled.
>
> This patch skips pick_next_task_fair in the slow path if it
> has already been invoked.
How about something like so?
Its a little more contained.
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -2636,8 +2636,14 @@ pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct tas
if (likely(prev->sched_class == class &&
rq->nr_running == rq->cfs.h_nr_running)) {
p = fair_sched_class.pick_next_task(rq, prev);
- if (likely(p && p != RETRY_TASK))
- return p;
+ if (unlikely(p == RETRY_TASK))
+ goto again;
+
+ /* assumes fair_sched_class->next == idle_sched_class */
+ if (unlikely(!p))
+ p = pick_next_task_idle(rq, prev);
+
+ return p;
}
again:
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-24 10:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-23 22:31 Tim Chen
2014-04-24 10:00 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2014-04-24 17:06 ` Tim Chen
2014-04-24 17:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-08 10:42 ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Skip double execution of pick_next_task_fair() tip-bot for 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=20140424100047.GP11096@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.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