From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
To: Li kunyu <likunyu@open-hieco.net>,
mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
vschneid@redhat.com, kprateek.nayak@amd.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] sched/fair: Introduce the SMT_BUDDY_ASSIST feature
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2026 13:25:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6d8ff4593cc93c0033c6537eeac281085726c220.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261020083746.37068-1-likunyu@open-hieco.net>
On Tue, 2026-10-20 at 16:37 +0800, Li kunyu wrote:
> [Background]
>
> In high-performance computing (HPC) and cloud computing scenarios,
> maximizing overall compute throughput and sustaining peak CPU capacity
> remain critical optimization goals. Within the scheduling domain, the
> primary optimization focuses include:
>
> 1. Timely responsiveness for task wakeup and execution startup.
>
> 2. Fast and balanced distribution of CPU utilization across cores.
>
> 3. Preferring task migration within shared-cache domains (e.g., L3)
> before burst workloads arrive, so as to reduce cross-die or
> cross-node overhead.
>
> During development, the following issues were encountered. The above
> approach ultimately yielded measurable performance improvements.
>
>
> [Problem]
>
> It was found that on servers equipped with the Hygon 7447v CPU (Model 7,
> 384 logical cores), migrating tasks across LLC scheduling domains during
> load balancing caused significant performance degradation:
>
> 1. A low L3 cache hitting rate (due to factors such as non-shared L3
> caches).
>
> 2. The traversal overhead of higher-level scheduling domains (e.g.,
> cross-NUMA scheduling domains).
>
> Similar issues were also observed on CPUs from other vendors during
> testing, though the degree of memory bandwidth increase and other
> latency effects varied. Consequently, a series of patches was developed
> to address and improve these issues.
>
>
> [Solution]
>
> This RFC patch series introduces the SMT_BUDDY_ASSIST scheduling
> feature. The main work is as follows:
>
> 1. Push CFS tasks to SMT sibling CPUs during periodic load balancing.
>
> 2. Skip SMT-domain balancing after a successful push and avoid pulling
> the pushed task back.
>
> 3. Restrict newidle balancing so it does not pull from higher-level
> scheduling domains.
Kunyu,
Have you tried to set relax_domain_level= in boot parameter to
prevent new idle balance across NUMA nodes?
grep . /sys/kernel/debug/sched/domains/cpu0/domain*/{name,level,flags}
to find the right level for NUMA and also if the SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE
is turned off for NUMA after you set relax_domain_level.
Wonder how much this will improve things for you.
Thanks.
Tim
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-22 20:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-20 8:37 Li kunyu
2026-10-20 8:37 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] sched/fair: Add SMT sibling push in periodic load balance Li kunyu
2026-10-21 12:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-20 8:37 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] sched/fair: Add is_smt_buddy_run() to skip SMT domain Li kunyu
2026-10-21 12:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-20 8:37 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] sched/fair: SMT sibling exclusion after successful push Li kunyu
2026-10-21 12:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-20 8:37 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] sched/fair: Restrict newidle balance to LLC domain Li kunyu
2026-10-21 12:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-20 8:37 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] sched/fair: Add task burst threshold for large-scale bursts Li kunyu
2026-10-21 12:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-20 8:37 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] sched/docs: Add documentation for SMT Buddy Assist feature Li kunyu
2026-10-21 12:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-21 12:44 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] sched/fair: Introduce the SMT_BUDDY_ASSIST feature Kayra Cizmeci
2026-10-22 7:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-22 10:08 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] sched/fair: Introduce the SMT BUDDY ASSIST feature Li kunyu
2026-10-22 16:02 ` Chen Yu
2026-10-22 20:25 ` Tim Chen [this message]
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=6d8ff4593cc93c0033c6537eeac281085726c220.camel@linux.intel.com \
--to=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=likunyu@open-hieco.net \
--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 \
/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®