mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
To: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org, joel.opensrc@gmail.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, juri.lelli@gmail.com,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, kernel-team@lge.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/2] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq()
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 14:44:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170821134458.gocjoobaybb45egi@e106622-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1503044519-2804-2-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com>

Hi,

On 18/08/17 17:21, Byungchul Park wrote:
> It would be better to try to check other siblings first if
> SD_PREFER_SIBLING is flaged when pushing tasks - migration.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>

Mmm, this looks like Peter's proposed patch, maybe add (at least) a
Suggested-by: him ?

https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=150176183807073

Also, I'm not sure what Peter meant with

"But still this isn't quite right, because when we consider this for SMT
(as was the intent here) we'll happily occupy a full sibling core over
finding an empty one."

since we are still using the later_mask, which should not include full
cores (unless it is the one with the lates deadline)?

> ---
>  kernel/sched/deadline.c | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> index 0223694..115250b 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> @@ -1319,12 +1319,35 @@ static struct task_struct *pick_earliest_pushable_dl_task(struct rq *rq, int cpu
>  
>  static DEFINE_PER_CPU(cpumask_var_t, local_cpu_mask_dl);
>  
> +/*
> + * Find the first cpu in: mask & sd & ~prefer
> + */
> +static int find_cpu(const struct cpumask *mask,
> +		    const struct sched_domain *sd,
> +		    const struct sched_domain *prefer)
> +{
> +	const struct cpumask *sds = sched_domain_span(sd);
> +	const struct cpumask *ps  = prefer ? sched_domain_span(prefer) : NULL;
> +	int cpu;
> +
> +	for_each_cpu(cpu, mask) {
> +		if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, sds))
> +			continue;
> +		if (ps && cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, ps))
> +			continue;
> +		break;
> +	}
> +
> +	return cpu;
> +}
> +
>  static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task)
>  {
> -	struct sched_domain *sd;
> +	struct sched_domain *sd, *prefer = NULL;
>  	struct cpumask *later_mask = this_cpu_cpumask_var_ptr(local_cpu_mask_dl);
>  	int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
>  	int cpu = task_cpu(task);
> +	int fallback_cpu = -1;
>  
>  	/* Make sure the mask is initialized first */
>  	if (unlikely(!later_mask))
> @@ -1376,8 +1399,7 @@ static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task)
>  				return this_cpu;
>  			}
>  
> -			best_cpu = cpumask_first_and(later_mask,
> -							sched_domain_span(sd));
> +			best_cpu = find_cpu(later_mask, sd, prefer);
>  			/*
>  			 * Last chance: if a cpu being in both later_mask
>  			 * and current sd span is valid, that becomes our
> @@ -1385,6 +1407,26 @@ static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task)
>  			 * already under consideration through later_mask.
>  			 */

It seems that the comment above should be updated as well.

Thanks,

- Juri

  reply	other threads:[~2017-08-21 13:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-08-18  8:21 [PATCH v8 0/2] Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology Byungchul Park
2017-08-18  8:21 ` [PATCH v8 1/2] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-08-21 13:44   ` Juri Lelli [this message]
2017-08-21 13:56     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-21 14:07       ` Juri Lelli
2017-08-22  5:55         ` Byungchul Park
2017-08-22  5:53     ` Byungchul Park
2017-08-22  7:12       ` Byungchul Park
2017-08-22  7:42       ` Juri Lelli
2017-08-18  8:21 ` [PATCH v8 2/2] sched/rt: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_lowest_rq() Byungchul Park
2017-08-18 13:38   ` Steven Rostedt

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=20170821134458.gocjoobaybb45egi@e106622-lin \
    --to=juri.lelli@arm.com \
    --cc=byungchul.park@lge.com \
    --cc=joel.opensrc@gmail.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@lge.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    /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®