From: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
Cc: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>, Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>,
Leonardo Bras <leobras@redhat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH v3 3/3] sched/topology: reorganize topology_span_sane() checking order
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2024 11:36:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240902183609.1683756-4-yury.norov@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240902183609.1683756-1-yury.norov@gmail.com>
The function currently makes 3 checks:
1. mc == mi;
2. cpumask_equal(mc, mi);
3. cpumask_intersects(mc, mi).
Historically, 2 last checks build a single condition for if() statement.
Logically, #1 and #2 should be tested together, because for the topology
sanity checking purposes, they do the same thing. In contrast, #3 tests
for intersection, which is a different logical unit.
This patch creates a helper for #1 and #2 and puts the corresponding
comment on top of the helper; unloading the main topology_span_sane().
Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
---
kernel/sched/topology.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++-------------
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/topology.c b/kernel/sched/topology.c
index 04a3b3d7b6f4..bbbe7955d37c 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/topology.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/topology.c
@@ -2346,6 +2346,22 @@ static struct sched_domain *build_sched_domain(struct sched_domain_topology_leve
return sd;
}
+/*
+ * Some topology levels (e.g. PKG in default_topology[]) have a
+ * sched_domain_mask_f implementation that reuses the same mask for
+ * several CPUs (in PKG's case, one mask * for all CPUs in the same
+ * NUMA node).
+ *
+ * For such topology levels, repeating cpumask_equal() checks is
+ * wasteful. Instead, we first check that the tl->mask(i) pointers
+ * aren't the same.
+ */
+static inline bool topology_cpumask_equal(const struct cpumask *m1,
+ const struct cpumask *m2)
+{
+ return m1 == m2 || cpumask_equal(m1, m2);
+}
+
/*
* Ensure topology masks are sane, i.e. there are no conflicts (overlaps) for
* any two given CPUs at this (non-NUMA) topology level.
@@ -2369,18 +2385,7 @@ static bool topology_span_sane(struct sched_domain_topology_level *tl,
*/
for_each_cpu_from(cpu, cpu_map) {
mi = tl->mask(cpu);
-
- /*
- * Some topology levels (e.g. PKG in default_topology[])
- * have a sched_domain_mask_f implementation that reuses
- * the same mask for several CPUs (in PKG's case, one mask
- * for all CPUs in the same NUMA node).
- *
- * For such topology levels, repeating cpumask_equal()
- * checks is wasteful. Instead, we first check that the
- * tl->mask(i) pointers aren't the same.
- */
- if (mi == mc)
+ if (topology_cpumask_equal(mc, mi))
continue;
/*
@@ -2389,7 +2394,7 @@ static bool topology_span_sane(struct sched_domain_topology_level *tl,
* remove CPUs, which only lessens our ability to detect
* overlaps
*/
- if (!cpumask_equal(mc, mi) && cpumask_intersects(mc, mi))
+ if (cpumask_intersects(mc, mi))
return false;
}
--
2.43.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-02 18:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-02 18:36 [PATCH v3 0/3] sched/topology: optimize topology_span_sane() Yury Norov
2024-09-02 18:36 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] sched/topology: pre-compute topology_span_sane() loop params Yury Norov
2024-09-02 18:36 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] sched/topology: optimize topology_span_sane() Yury Norov
2024-09-02 18:36 ` Yury Norov [this message]
2024-09-14 16:54 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] " Yury Norov
2024-09-30 19:14 ` Yury Norov
2024-11-06 16:28 ` Yury Norov
2024-11-06 17:58 ` Christophe JAILLET
2024-11-06 18:03 ` Yury Norov
2024-11-06 18:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-07 15:22 ` Yury Norov
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=20240902183609.1683756-4-yury.norov@gmail.com \
--to=yury.norov@gmail.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=leobras@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=yu.c.chen@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®