From: Hao Jia <jiahao.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org,
juri.lelli@redhat.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
vschneid@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Hao Jia <jiahao1@lixiang.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched/core: Prioritize migrating eligible tasks in sched_balance_rq()
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 14:13:15 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5b6d669a-4fb9-5d24-6e08-1dc121438194@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53082ec4-d862-6135-8d22-44dd2742156a@gmail.com>
On 2025/1/20 13:48, Hao Jia wrote:
>
>
> On 2025/1/16 19:26, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 12:55, Hao Jia <jiahao.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2025/1/15 17:28, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 09:55, Hao Jia <jiahao.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2025/1/14 16:07, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 at 04:18, Hao Jia <jiahao.kernel@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2025/1/14 00:40, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 at 10:21, Hao Jia <jiahao.kernel@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Friendly ping...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2024/12/23 17:14, Hao Jia wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> From: Hao Jia <jiahao1@lixiang.com>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When the PLACE_LAG scheduling feature is enabled and
>>>>>>>>>> dst_cfs_rq->nr_queued is greater than 1, if a task is
>>>>>>>>>> ineligible (lag < 0) on the source cpu runqueue, it will
>>>>>>>>>> also be ineligible when it is migrated to the destination
>>>>>>>>>> cpu runqueue. Because we will keep the original equivalent
>>>>>>>>>> lag of the task in place_entity(). So if the task was
>>>>>>>>>> ineligible before, it will still be ineligible after
>>>>>>>>>> migration.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So in sched_balance_rq(), we prioritize migrating eligible
>>>>>>>>>> tasks, and we soft-limit ineligible tasks, allowing them
>>>>>>>>>> to migrate only when nr_balance_failed is non-zero to
>>>>>>>>>> avoid load-balancing trying very hard to balance the load.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Could you explain why you think it's better to balance eligible
>>>>>>>> tasks
>>>>>>>> in priority and potentially skip a load balance ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In place_entity(), we maintain the task's original equivalent
>>>>>>> lag, even
>>>>>>> if we migrate the task to dst_rq, this does not change its
>>>>>>> eligibility
>>>>>>> attribute.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, but you don't answer the question why it's better to select an
>>>>>> eligible task vs a non eligible task.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When there are multiple tasks on src_rq, and the dst_cpu has some
>>>>>>> runnable tasks, migrating ineligible tasks to dst_rq will not
>>>>>>> allow them
>>>>>>> to run. Therefore, such task migration is inefficient. We should
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why is it inefficient ? load balance is about evenly balancing the
>>>>>> number of tasks or the load between CPUs, it never says that the
>>>>>> newly
>>>>>> migrated task should run immediately
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> My initial thought is that when we need to migrate some tasks during
>>>>> load balancing, at the current point in time, migrating ineligible
>>>>> tasks
>>>>> to dst_cpu means they definitely cannot run there. Therefore, I prefer
>>>>> to keep them on src_cpu to reduce the overhead of dequeueing and
>>>>> enqueueing ineligible tasks.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry but I still don't get why it's important and would make a
>>>> difference. They are all runnable but ineligible tasks got more
>>>> runtime than other at that point in time so there is no real
>>>> difference
>>>
>>>
>>> I adopt a lazy strategy for ineligible tasks. At the current point in
>>> time, even if we migrate ineligible tasks to the dst CPU, they still
>>> have to wait on the dst CPU until they become eligible. We do not see
>>> clear benefits from migrating ineligible tasks, but their dequeueing and
>>> enqueueing would instead incur overhead.
>>
>> But your explanation doesn't make sense.
>> Not migrating an ineligible task only make sense for delayed_dequeue
>> tasks because they don't really want to run but only exhaust their lag
>> but this is already taken into account by
>> 61b82dfb6b7e ("sched/fair: Do not try to migrate delayed dequeue task")
>>
>
> Thank you for your suggestion.
>
> Yes, as you mentioned, this commit 61b82dfb6b7e ("sched/fair: Do not try
> to migrate delayed dequeue task") reduces the migration of
> delayed_dequeue tasks, but it doesn't work for ineligible RUNNING tasks
> and when the migration_type is migrate_load.
>
>
>> Did you run your benchmark on top of this change ?
>
> My previous benchmark tests were based on the torvalds/linux/master
> branch, which does not include commit 61b82dfb6b7e ("sched/fair: Do not
> try to migrate delayed dequeue task"). I will include this commit and
> retest on my machine after my leave ends.
>
I'm really sorry for being away for so long. I have retested the
hackbench on my machine, which includes the commit 61b82dfb6b7e
("sched/fair: Do not try to migrate delayed dequeue task"). Based on the
hackbench test results, this patch still brings a slight performance
improvement.
vanilla: Includes commit 61b82dfb6b7e ("sched/fair: Do not try to
migrate delayed dequeue task"), but does not include my patch.
patched: Includes both the above commit and my patch.
hackbench-process-pipes
vanilla patched
Amean 1 0.4087 ( 0.00%) 0.4003 ( 2.04%)
Amean 4 1.7033 ( 0.00%) 1.7100 ( -0.39%)
Amean 7 2.9020 ( 0.00%) 2.8750 ( 0.93%)
Amean 12 4.2543 ( 0.00%) 4.2980 ( -1.03%)
Amean 21 5.8633 ( 0.00%) 5.7507 ( 1.92%)
Amean 30 7.3757 ( 0.00%) 7.2887 ( 1.18%)
Amean 48 10.5360 ( 0.00%) 10.2647 ( 2.58%)
Amean 79 16.5480 ( 0.00%) 15.9820 ( 3.42%)
Amean 96 19.7873 ( 0.00%) 19.1347 ( 3.30%)
hackbench-process-sockets
vanilla patched
Amean 1 0.7520 ( 0.00%) 0.7377 ( 1.91%)
Amean 4 2.5760 ( 0.00%) 2.5103 ( 2.55%)
Amean 7 4.3927 ( 0.00%) 4.2653 ( 2.90%)
Amean 12 7.3923 ( 0.00%) 7.1427 ( 3.38%)
Amean 21 12.3733 ( 0.00%) 11.9760 ( 3.21%)
Amean 30 17.2617 ( 0.00%) 16.7987 ( 2.68%)
Amean 48 28.8577 ( 0.00%) 28.1980 ( 2.29%)
Amean 79 50.0687 ( 0.00%) 49.0887 ( 1.96%)
Amean 96 62.1603 ( 0.00%) 61.1177 ( 1.68%)
FYI.
After the performance tests, I added some code in the can_migrate_task()
to count the different reasons why tasks could not be migrated during
the hackbench run.
hit_delayed_dequeue_cnt: Hit if (p->se.sched_delayed) &&
(env->migration_type != migrate_load)
hit_ineligible_cnt: Did not hit "hit_delayed_dequeue" &&
!env->sd->nr_balance_failed && task_is_ineligible_on_dst_cpu()
Count results:
hit_delayed_dequeue_cnt 378432
hit_ineligible_cnt 1862099
Thanks,
Hao
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-17 6:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-23 9:14 Hao Jia
2024-12-23 20:50 ` Markus Elfring
2024-12-24 1:53 ` Hao Jia
2024-12-24 8:55 ` [v2] " Markus Elfring
2025-01-13 9:21 ` [PATCH v2] " Hao Jia
2025-01-13 16:40 ` Vincent Guittot
2025-01-14 3:18 ` Hao Jia
2025-01-14 8:07 ` Vincent Guittot
2025-01-15 8:55 ` Hao Jia
2025-01-15 9:28 ` Vincent Guittot
2025-01-15 11:55 ` Hao Jia
2025-01-16 11:26 ` Vincent Guittot
2025-01-20 5:48 ` Hao Jia
2025-02-17 6:13 ` Hao Jia [this message]
2025-01-15 9:17 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Hao Jia
2025-01-15 13:18 ` [PATCH v2] " Luis Machado
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=5b6d669a-4fb9-5d24-6e08-1dc121438194@gmail.com \
--to=jiahao.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=jiahao1@lixiang.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.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®