From: Changwoo Min <changwoo@igalia.com>
To: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
Cc: tj@kernel.org, void@manifault.com, mingo@redhat.com,
peterz@infradead.org, kernel-dev@igalia.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/6] sched_ext: Implement scx_rq_clock_update/stale()
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 16:21:00 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <41fdc3ec-7082-41f9-99b5-ab28838d9ec1@igalia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z1a7EfETQi3FSLJG@gpd3>
Hello Andrea,
Thank you for the review.
On 24. 12. 9. 18:40, Andrea Righi wrote:
>> @@ -766,9 +767,11 @@ struct scx_rq {
>> unsigned long ops_qseq;
>> u64 extra_enq_flags; /* see move_task_to_local_dsq() */
>> u32 nr_running;
>> - u32 flags;
>> u32 cpuperf_target; /* [0, SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE] */
>> bool cpu_released;
>> + u32 flags;
>> + u64 clock; /* current per-rq clock -- see scx_bpf_now_ns() */
>> + u64 prev_clock; /* previous per-rq clock -- see scx_bpf_now_ns() */
>
> Since we're reordering this struct, we may want to move cpu_released all
> the way to the bottom to get rid of the 3-bytes hole (and still have
> flags, clock and prev_clock in the same cacheline).
We'd better keep the layout as it is. That is because moving
cpu_released to the end of the struct creates 4-byte hole between
flags and clock and 7-byte padding at the end after cpu_released.
I double-checked the two layouts using pahole.
> Nit, this is just personal preference (feel free to ignore it):
>
> if (!scx_enabled())
> return;
> rq->scx.prev_clock = rq->scx.clock;
> rq->scx.clock = clock;
> rq->scx.flags |= SCX_RQ_CLK_VALID;
>
That's prettier. I will change it as you suggested.
> I'm wondering if we need to invalidate the clock on all rqs when we call
> scx_ops_enable() to prevent getting stale information from a previous
> scx scheduler.
>
> Probably it's not an issue, since scx_ops_disable_workfn() should make
> sure that all tasks are going through rq_unpin_lock() before unloading
> the current scheduler, maybe it could be helpful to add comment about
> this scenario in scx_bpf_now_ns() (PATCH 4/6)?
That's a good catch. In theory, there is a possibility that
a scx_rq is not invalidated when unloading the sched_ext. Since
scx_ops_disable_workfn() iterates all the sched_ext tasks, an rq
would not be invalidated if there is no scx task on the rq.
I will add the code which iterates and invalidates all scx_rqs at
scx_ops_disable_workfn() in the next version.
Thank you again!
Changwoo Min
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-10 7:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-09 6:15 [PATCH v4 0/6] sched_ext: Support high-performance monotonically non-decreasing clock Changwoo Min
2024-12-09 6:15 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] sched_ext: Relocate scx_enabled() related code Changwoo Min
2024-12-11 7:27 ` Tejun Heo
2024-12-11 7:37 ` Tejun Heo
2024-12-09 6:15 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] sched_ext: Implement scx_rq_clock_update/stale() Changwoo Min
2024-12-09 9:40 ` Andrea Righi
2024-12-10 7:21 ` Changwoo Min [this message]
2024-12-11 7:43 ` Tejun Heo
2024-12-13 1:16 ` Changwoo Min
2024-12-09 6:15 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] sched_ext: Manage the validity of scx_rq_clock Changwoo Min
2024-12-09 6:15 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] sched_ext: Implement scx_bpf_now_ns() Changwoo Min
2024-12-11 8:14 ` Tejun Heo
2024-12-13 1:41 ` Changwoo Min
2024-12-11 9:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-12-13 2:01 ` Changwoo Min
2024-12-09 6:15 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] sched_ext: Add scx_bpf_now_ns() for BPF scheduler Changwoo Min
2024-12-09 6:15 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] sched_ext: Replace bpf_ktime_get_ns() to scx_bpf_now_ns() Changwoo Min
2024-12-09 9:51 ` [PATCH v4 0/6] sched_ext: Support high-performance monotonically non-decreasing clock Andrea Righi
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=41fdc3ec-7082-41f9-99b5-ab28838d9ec1@igalia.com \
--to=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=kernel-dev@igalia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=void@manifault.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®