mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>, Todd Kjos <tkjos@android.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] sched/fair: add util_est on top of PELT
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 13:58:00 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171215125800.fshczo2tgilmcdtk@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171215120331.GA19821@e110439-lin>

On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 12:03:31PM +0000, Patrick Bellasi wrote:

> So, by moving util_est right after sched_avg, here is what we get (with some
> lines to better highlight 64B boundaries):
> 
>                 const struct sched_class  * sched_class;                                 /*   152     8 */
>                 struct sched_entity {
> 			[...]
> 		---[ Line 9 ]-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                         struct sched_avg {
>                                 /* typedef u64 */ long long unsigned int last_update_time; /*   576     8 */
>                                 /* typedef u64 */ long long unsigned int load_sum;       /*   584     8 */
>                                 /* typedef u64 */ long long unsigned int runnable_load_sum; /*   592     8 */
>                                 /* typedef u32 */ unsigned int util_sum;                 /*   600     4 */
>                                 /* typedef u32 */ unsigned int period_contrib;           /*   604     4 */
>                                 long unsigned int load_avg;                              /*   608     8 */
>                                 long unsigned int runnable_load_avg;                     /*   616     8 */
>                                 long unsigned int util_avg;                              /*   624     8 */
>                         } avg; /*   576    56 */
>                         /* --- cacheline 6 boundary (384 bytes) was 24 bytes ago --- */
>                         struct util_est {
>                                 long unsigned int last;                                  /*   632     8 */
> 		---[ Line 10 ]------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                                 long unsigned int ewma;                                  /*   640     8 */
>                         } util_est; /*   632    16 */
>                 } se; /*   192   512 */
> 		---[ Line 11 ]------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 /* --- cacheline 9 boundary (576 bytes) was 24 bytes ago --- */
>                 struct sched_rt_entity {
>                         struct list_head {
>                                 struct list_head * next;                                 /*   704     8 */
>                                 struct list_head * prev;                                 /*   712     8 */
>                         } run_list; /*   704    16 */
> 
> 
> As you can see we still end up with util_est spanning acrosss two cache and
> even worst with an almost empty Line 10. The point is that sched_avg already
> uses 56B... which leave just 8bytes left.

Yes, that's unfortunate.

> So, I can to move util_est there and use unsigned int for "last" and "ewma"
> storage. This should fix the cache alignment but only until we do not add
> other stuff to sched_avg.
> 
> BTW, should not be possible to use a similar "fasting" approach for load_avg
> and runnable_load_avg? Given their range a u32 should be just good enough,
> isn't it?

Probably, I'd have to page all that stuff back in :/

Another issue is that for tasks load and runnable_load are the exact
same; I just never found a sensible way to collapse that.

  reply	other threads:[~2017-12-15 12:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-12-05 17:10 [PATCH v2 0/4] Utilization estimation (util_est) for FAIR tasks Patrick Bellasi
2017-12-05 17:10 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] sched/fair: always used unsigned long for utilization Patrick Bellasi
2017-12-06  8:56   ` Vincent Guittot
2018-01-10 12:14   ` [tip:sched/core] sched/fair: Use 'unsigned long' for utilization, consistently tip-bot for Patrick Bellasi
2017-12-05 17:10 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] sched/fair: add util_est on top of PELT Patrick Bellasi
2017-12-13 16:05   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-15 14:02     ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-12-15 14:07       ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-15 15:22         ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-12-13 16:16   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-15 12:14     ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-12-15 12:53       ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-15 15:41         ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-12-20  8:57           ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-20  9:02             ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-13 16:19   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-13 16:36     ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-12-13 17:03       ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-15 12:03         ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-12-15 12:58           ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2017-12-05 17:10 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] sched/fair: use util_est in LB and WU paths Patrick Bellasi
2017-12-05 17:10 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: use util_est for OPP selection Patrick Bellasi
2017-12-16  2:35   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-18 10:48     ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-12-13 16:03 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] Utilization estimation (util_est) for FAIR tasks Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-13 16:23   ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-12-13 17:56 ` Mike Galbraith
2017-12-15 16:13   ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-12-15 20:23     ` Mike Galbraith
2017-12-16  6:37       ` Mike Galbraith

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=20171215125800.fshczo2tgilmcdtk@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=joelaf@google.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
    --cc=patrick.bellasi@arm.com \
    --cc=pjt@google.com \
    --cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
    --cc=tkjos@android.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.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®