From: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@redhat.com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.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>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched: Optimise task_mm_cid_work duration
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2024 15:56:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6b7b30528893b091b21a06ead610709219cd9ba0.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c9a39d2e-6829-4bc5-b560-347ee79ff2e8@efficios.com>
Hi Mathieu,
thanks for the quick reply.
> Thanks for looking into this. I understand that you are after
> minimizing the
> latency introduced by task_mm_cid_work on isolated cores. I think
> we'll need
> to think a bit harder, because the proposed solution does not work:
>
> * for_each_cpu_from - iterate over CPUs present in @mask, from @cpu
> to the end of @mask.
>
> cpu is uninitialized. So this is completely broken.
My bad, wrong macro.. Should be for_each_cpu
> Was this tested
> against a workload that actually uses concurrency IDs to ensure it
> does
> not break the whole thing ? Did you run the rseq selftests ?
>
I did run the stress-ng --rseq command for a while and didn't see any
error reported, but it's probably not bulletproof. I'll use the
selftests for the next iterations.
> Also, the mm_cidmask is a mask of concurrency IDs, not a mask of
> CPUs. So
> using it to iterate on CPUs is wrong.
>
Mmh I get it, during my tests I was definitely getting better results
than using the mm_cpus_allowed mask, but I guess that was a broken test
so it just doesn't count..
Do you think using mm_cpus_allowed would make more sense, with the
/risk/ of being a bit over-cautious?
Gabriele
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-02 14:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-02 14:07 [PATCH 0/2] sched: improve task_mm_cid_work impact on isolated systems Gabriele Monaco
2024-12-02 14:07 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched: Optimise task_mm_cid_work duration Gabriele Monaco
2024-12-02 14:21 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-12-02 14:56 ` Gabriele Monaco [this message]
2024-12-02 15:01 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-12-02 15:59 ` Gabriele Monaco
2024-12-03 2:14 ` kernel test robot
2024-12-02 14:07 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched: Move task_mm_cid_work to RCU callback Gabriele Monaco
2024-12-02 14:34 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-12-02 15:21 ` Gabriele Monaco
2024-12-03 15:00 ` Joel Fernandes
2024-12-04 8:01 ` Gabriele Monaco
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=6b7b30528893b091b21a06ead610709219cd9ba0.camel@redhat.com \
--to=gmonaco@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--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 \
/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®