From: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
To: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>
Cc: "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri@intel.com>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Tim C . Chen" <tim.c.chen@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 08/10] sched/topology: Remove SHARED_CHILD from ASYM_PACKING
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2023 11:08:11 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230305190811.GA4352@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZAHaMKH7C0sVIjXX@arm.com>
On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 11:29:52AM +0000, Ionela Voinescu wrote:
> Hi Ricardo,
Hi Ionela!
>
> On Monday 06 Feb 2023 at 20:58:36 (-0800), Ricardo Neri wrote:
> > Only x86 and Power7 use ASYM_PACKING. They use it differently.
> >
> > Power7 has cores of equal priority, but the SMT siblings of a core have
> > different priorities. Parent scheduling domains do not need (nor have) the
> > ASYM_PACKING flag. SHARED_CHILD is not needed. Using SHARED_PARENT would
> > cause the topology debug code to complain.
> >
> > X86 has cores of different priority, but all the SMT siblings of the core
> > have equal priority. It needs ASYM_PACKING at the MC level, but not at the
> > SMT level (it also needs it at upper levels if they have scheduling groups
> > of different priority). Removing ASYM_PACKING from the SMT domain causes
> > the topology debug code to complain.
> >
> > Remove SHARED_CHILD for now. We still need a topology check that satisfies
> > both architectures.
> >
> > Cc: Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>
> > Cc: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>
> > Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
> > Cc: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> > Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
> > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > Cc: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> > Cc: Tim C. Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>
> > Cc: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
> > Cc: x86@kernel.org
> > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > Suggested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > Changes since v2:
> > * Introduced this patch.
> >
> > Changes since v1:
> > * N/A
> > ---
> > include/linux/sched/sd_flags.h | 5 +----
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/sched/sd_flags.h b/include/linux/sched/sd_flags.h
> > index 57bde66d95f7..800238854ba5 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/sched/sd_flags.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/sched/sd_flags.h
> > @@ -132,12 +132,9 @@ SD_FLAG(SD_SERIALIZE, SDF_SHARED_PARENT | SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)
> > /*
> > * Place busy tasks earlier in the domain
> > *
> > - * SHARED_CHILD: Usually set on the SMT level. Technically could be set further
> > - * up, but currently assumed to be set from the base domain
> > - * upwards (see update_top_cache_domain()).
> > * NEEDS_GROUPS: Load balancing flag.
> > */
> > -SD_FLAG(SD_ASYM_PACKING, SDF_SHARED_CHILD | SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)
> > +SD_FLAG(SD_ASYM_PACKING, SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)
>
> While this silences the warning one would have gotten when removing
> SD_ASYM_PACKING from SMT level, it will still result in sd_asym_packing
> being NULL for these systems, which breaks nohz balance. That is because
> highest_flag_domain() still stops searching at the first level without
> the flag set, in this case SMT, even if levels above have the flag set.
You are absolutely right! This how this whole discussion started. It
slipped my mind.
>
> Maybe highest_flag_domain() should be changed to take into account the
> metadata flags?
What about the patch below? Search will stop if the flag has
SDF_SHARED_CHILD as it does today. Otherwise it will search all the
domains.
--- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
+++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
@@ -1773,6 +1773,12 @@ queue_balance_callback(struct rq *rq,
for (__sd = rcu_dereference_check_sched_domain(cpu_rq(cpu)->sd); \
__sd; __sd = __sd->parent)
+#define SD_FLAG(name, mflags) (name * !!((mflags) & SDF_SHARED_CHILD)) |
+static const unsigned int SD_SHARED_CHILD_MASK =
+#include <linux/sched/sd_flags.h>
+0;
+#undef SD_FLAG
+
/**
* highest_flag_domain - Return highest sched_domain containing flag.
* @cpu: The CPU whose highest level of sched domain is to
@@ -1781,15 +1787,19 @@ queue_balance_callback(struct rq *rq,
* for the given CPU.
*
* Returns the highest sched_domain of a CPU which contains the given flag.
- */
+*/
static inline struct sched_domain *highest_flag_domain(int cpu, int flag)
{
struct sched_domain *sd, *hsd = NULL;
for_each_domain(cpu, sd) {
- if (!(sd->flags & flag))
+ if (sd->flags & flag) {
+ hsd = sd;
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ if (flag & SD_SHARED_CHILD_MASK)
break;
- hsd = sd;
}
return hsd;
>
> Thanks,
> Ionela.
>
> >
> > /*
> > * Prefer to place tasks in a sibling domain
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-05 18:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-07 4:58 [PATCH v3 00/10] sched/fair: Avoid unnecessary migrations within SMT domains Ricardo Neri
2023-02-07 4:58 ` [PATCH v3 01/10] sched/fair: Generalize asym_packing logic for SMT cores Ricardo Neri
2023-02-07 4:58 ` [PATCH v3 02/10] sched/fair: Move is_core_idle() out of CONFIG_NUMA Ricardo Neri
2023-02-07 4:58 ` [PATCH v3 03/10] sched/fair: Only do asym_packing load balancing from fully idle SMT cores Ricardo Neri
2023-02-07 4:58 ` [PATCH v3 04/10] sched/fair: Let low-priority cores help high-priority busy " Ricardo Neri
2023-02-08 7:56 ` Vincent Guittot
2023-02-09 11:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-10 0:43 ` Ricardo Neri
2023-02-10 8:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-10 13:05 ` Ricardo Neri
2023-02-10 1:52 ` Ricardo Neri
2023-02-13 13:40 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-02-13 23:23 ` Ricardo Neri
2023-03-10 0:51 ` Tim Chen
2023-03-14 23:54 ` Ricardo Neri
2023-02-07 4:58 ` [PATCH v3 05/10] sched/fair: Keep a fully_busy SMT sched group as busiest Ricardo Neri
2023-02-07 4:58 ` [PATCH v3 06/10] sched/fair: Use the prefer_sibling flag of the current sched domain Ricardo Neri
2023-02-08 7:48 ` Vincent Guittot
2023-02-10 13:24 ` Ricardo Neri
2023-02-09 13:17 ` Chen Yu
2023-02-09 20:00 ` Chen, Tim C
2023-02-09 23:05 ` Tim Chen
2023-02-10 3:16 ` Ricardo Neri
2023-02-10 6:55 ` Chen Yu
2023-02-10 10:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-10 14:54 ` Valentin Schneider
2023-02-10 16:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-10 17:12 ` Valentin Schneider
2023-02-10 18:31 ` Ricardo Neri
2023-02-13 12:17 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-02-14 6:43 ` Ricardo Neri
2023-02-16 5:21 ` Ricardo Neri
2023-02-16 12:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-17 1:41 ` Ricardo Neri
2023-02-23 10:09 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-02-24 12:29 ` Ricardo Neri
[not found] ` <tencent_60A804570F09C0CFE0495D5B984941123A05@qq.com>
2023-02-20 9:45 ` Valentin Schneider
[not found] ` <tencent_6C38D389245FD03C6E1312999FEDD394F606@qq.com>
2023-02-21 18:15 ` Valentin Schneider
2023-02-07 4:58 ` [PATCH v3 07/10] sched/fair: Do not even the number of busy CPUs via asym_packing Ricardo Neri
2023-02-13 12:44 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-02-13 19:47 ` Ricardo Neri
2023-02-07 4:58 ` [PATCH v3 08/10] sched/topology: Remove SHARED_CHILD from ASYM_PACKING Ricardo Neri
2023-03-03 11:29 ` Ionela Voinescu
2023-03-05 19:08 ` Ricardo Neri [this message]
2023-03-06 13:10 ` Ionela Voinescu
2023-03-06 18:17 ` Ricardo Neri
2023-02-07 4:58 ` [PATCH v3 09/10] x86/sched: Remove SD_ASYM_PACKING from the SMT domain flags Ricardo Neri
2023-02-07 4:58 ` [PATCH v3 10/10] x86/sched/itmt: Give all SMT siblings of a core the same priority Ricardo Neri
2023-02-09 8:07 ` [PATCH v3 00/10] sched/fair: Avoid unnecessary migrations within SMT domains Zhang, Rui
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=20230305190811.GA4352@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com \
--to=ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=ionela.voinescu@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=ravi.v.shankar@intel.com \
--cc=ricardo.neri@intel.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@intel.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.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
Powered by JetHome