mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
To: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	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>,
	"Christian Loehle" <christian.loehle@arm.com>,
	Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>, Koba Ko <kobak@nvidia.com>,
	Felix Abecassis <fabecassis@nvidia.com>,
	Balbir Singh <balbirs@nvidia.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>,
	Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
	<yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] sched/fair: Attach sched_domain_shared to sd_asym_cpucapacity
Date: Tue, 19 May 2026 13:17:20 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55196e3b-ba1e-42c9-b80b-5c91306df452@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <agwGl6zhn5cw3vQt@gpd4>

Hello Andrea,

Thank you for taking a look at the diff!

On 5/19/2026 12:13 PM, Andrea Righi wrote:
> Hi Prateek,
> 
> On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 11:22:32AM +0530, K Prateek Nayak wrote:
>> Hello Peter, Andrea,
>>
>> On 5/19/2026 2:28 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> @@@ -2775,20 -3049,16 +3107,15 @@@ build_sched_domains(const struct cpumas
>>>   		if (!sd)
>>>   			continue;
>>>   
>>>  +		if (has_asym)
>>> - 			asym_claimed = claim_asym_sched_domain_shared(&d, i);
>>> ++			claim_asym_sched_domain_shared(&d, i);
>>>  +
>>>   		/* First, find the topmost SD_SHARE_LLC domain */
>>>   		while (sd->parent && (sd->parent->flags & SD_SHARE_LLC))
>>>   			sd = sd->parent;
>>>   
>>>   		if (sd->flags & SD_SHARE_LLC) {
>>> - 			/*
>>> - 			 * Initialize the sd->shared for SD_SHARE_LLC unless
>>> - 			 * the asym path above already claimed it.
>>> - 			 */
>>> - 			if (!asym_claimed)
>>> - 				init_sched_domain_shared(&d, sd);
>>>  -			int sd_id = cpumask_first(sched_domain_span(sd));
>>>  -
>>>  -			sd->shared = *per_cpu_ptr(d.sds, sd_id);
>>>  -			atomic_set(&sd->shared->nr_busy_cpus, sd->span_weight);
>>>  -			atomic_inc(&sd->shared->ref);
>>> ++			init_sched_domain_shared(&d, sd);
>>
>> This will run into a small problem with "nr_idle_scan" if
>> cpumask_first(sched_domain_span(sd)) is the same for both sd_asym and
>> sd_llc.
> 
> Ah, good catch! When cpumask_first(asym_span) == cpumask_first(llc_span)
> (big.LITTLE typical case), both sd_asym->shared and sd_llc->shared would alias
> to d->sds[0].
> 
>>
>> Load balancer at different domains will populate "nr_idle_scan" with
>> different values and they alias to same ->shared if one isn't
>> degenerated and I believe there is at least one way to hit the WARN_ON()
>> from cpu_attach_domain() if the SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY_FULL comes before
>> the last SD_SHARE_LLC domain and the latter is degenerated.
>>
>> How about this:
>>
>>   (On top of queue:sched/core; Lightly tested on !ASYM_CPUCAPACITY system)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/topology.h b/include/linux/sched/topology.h
>> index fe09d3268bc9..1d2c98dca211 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/sched/topology.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/sched/topology.h
>> @@ -67,7 +67,15 @@ struct sched_domain_shared {
>>  	atomic_t	ref;
>>  	atomic_t	nr_busy_cpus;
>>  	int		has_idle_cores;
>> -	int		nr_idle_scan;
>> +	union {
>> +		int	nr_idle_scan;
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Used during allocation to claim the
>> +		 * sched_domain_shared object at
>> +		 * multiple levels.
> 
> I think between build and the first LB tick, readers of nr_idle_scan may observe
> leftover SD_* flags in nr_idle_scan. This shouldn't be a problem and should
> self-heal soon, but maybe it's worth a comment? Something like:
> 
>   * Note: between build and the first periodic LB tick, which
>   * rewrites the union via update_idle_cpu_scan(), readers of
>   * nr_idle_scan may observe the transient SD_* flag value as
>   * the scan bound. The flag bits are small positive integers,
>   * so the effect is just a slightly relaxed scan bound for one
>   * window and self-heals on the first tick.

Ack! We start with 0 today which isn't representative of the system
state either and depend on the eventual correctness to fix the value
after a hotplug / cpuset.

I can fold in the note and resend it as a formal patch.

Peter, would you prefer a formal patch or would you like to do this
(or something similar) as a part of the conflict resolution itself?

>> +	BUG_ON(!sd->shared);
> 
> Unreachable in practice, but should we have a WARN_ON_ONCE() +
> bail/early-return? In this way we'd fall back to using LLC's shared for
> sd_balance_shared, which seems nicer than a BUG_ON().

Ack! We can just use the last CPU's "sds" if we don't end up finding a
free one as a backup. I just had the BUG_ON() to easily spot my VM
crashing ;-)

-- 
Thanks and Regards,
Prateek


  reply	other threads:[~2026-05-19  7:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-05-09 18:07 [PATCH v6 0/5 RESEND] sched/fair: SMT-aware asymmetric CPU capacity Andrea Righi
2026-05-09 18:07 ` [PATCH 1/5] sched/fair: Drop redundant RCU read lock in NOHZ kick path Andrea Righi
2026-05-11 13:04   ` Vincent Guittot
2026-05-15  6:49   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-05-16  5:45     ` Andrea Righi
2026-05-16 17:15       ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-05-20  8:34   ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Andrea Righi
     [not found]   ` <CGME20260521194704eucas1p19ffbed79a4ae514fb1136218c567add6@eucas1p1.samsung.com>
2026-05-21 19:47     ` [PATCH 1/5] " Marek Szyprowski
2026-05-21 20:13       ` Andrea Righi
2026-05-09 18:07 ` [PATCH 2/5] sched/fair: Attach sched_domain_shared to sd_asym_cpucapacity Andrea Righi
2026-05-11 13:04   ` Vincent Guittot
2026-05-15 10:05   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-05-16  5:58     ` [PATCH v2 " Andrea Righi
2026-05-16 17:19       ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-05-18 20:58       ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-05-18 21:31         ` Andrea Righi
2026-05-19  5:52         ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-05-19  6:43           ` Andrea Righi
2026-05-19  7:47             ` K Prateek Nayak [this message]
2026-05-19  7:54               ` Andrea Righi
2026-05-19  8:46           ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-05-19 11:27             ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-05-19 11:47               ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-05-25  8:30                 ` Chen, Yu C
2026-05-20  8:34       ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for K Prateek Nayak
2026-07-03 10:22   ` kmemleak: sched_domain_shared leaked on asymmetric-capacity + SCHED_CACHE Breno Leitao
2026-07-03 10:35     ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-07-03 16:19       ` Breno Leitao
2026-07-04  6:16         ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-07-06 14:38           ` Dietmar Eggemann
2026-07-07  4:11             ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-07-07 13:31               ` Breno Leitao
2026-07-07 13:59                 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-07-07 15:31                   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2026-05-09 18:07 ` [PATCH 3/5] sched/fair: Prefer fully-idle SMT cores in asym-capacity idle selection Andrea Righi
2026-05-11 13:07   ` Vincent Guittot
2026-05-11 13:45     ` Andrea Righi
2026-05-11 14:25     ` [PATCH v2 " Andrea Righi
2026-05-20  8:34       ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Andrea Righi
2026-05-09 18:07 ` [PATCH 4/5] sched/fair: Reject misfit pulls onto busy SMT siblings on asym-capacity Andrea Righi
2026-05-11 13:07   ` Vincent Guittot
2026-05-15 10:09   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-05-16  9:04     ` Andrea Righi
2026-05-20  8:34   ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Andrea Righi
2026-05-09 18:07 ` [PATCH 5/5] sched/fair: Add SIS_UTIL support to select_idle_capacity() Andrea Righi
2026-05-11 13:08   ` Vincent Guittot
2026-05-20  8:34   ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for K Prateek Nayak

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=55196e3b-ba1e-42c9-b80b-5c91306df452@amd.com \
    --to=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
    --cc=balbirs@nvidia.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=christian.loehle@arm.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=fabecassis@nvidia.com \
    --cc=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=kobak@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=pauld@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --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