From: Subhra Mazumdar <subhra.mazumdar@oracle.com>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
prakash.sangappa@oracle.com, dhaval.giani@oracle.com,
daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
viresh.kumar@linaro.org, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com,
mgorman@techsingularity.net
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] sched: introduce tunables to control soft affinity
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 12:53:19 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <81034dd8-4074-e716-c3e8-5a23cbb6bb8d@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190718100816.GA19218@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 7/18/19 3:38 PM, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> * subhra mazumdar <subhra.mazumdar@oracle.com> [2019-06-26 15:47:18]:
>
>> For different workloads the optimal "softness" of soft affinity can be
>> different. Introduce tunables sched_allowed and sched_preferred that can
>> be tuned via /proc. This allows to chose at what utilization difference
>> the scheduler will chose cpus_allowed over cpus_preferred in the first
>> level of search. Depending on the extent of data sharing, cache coherency
>> overhead of the system etc. the optimal point may vary.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: subhra mazumdar <subhra.mazumdar@oracle.com>
>> ---
> Correct me but this patchset only seems to be concentrated on the wakeup
> path, I don't see any changes in the regular load balancer or the
> numa-balancer. If system is loaded or tasks are CPU intensive, then wouldn't
> these tasks be moved to cpus_allowed instead of cpus_preferred and hence
> breaking this soft affinity.
>
The new idle is purposefully unchanged, if threads get stolen to the allowed
set from the preferred set that's intended, together with the enqueue side
it will achieve softness of affinity.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-19 7:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-26 22:47 [RFC PATCH 0/3] Scheduler Soft Affinity subhra mazumdar
2019-06-26 22:47 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] sched: Introduce new interface for scheduler soft affinity subhra mazumdar
2019-07-02 16:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-02 16:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-26 22:47 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] sched: change scheduler to give preference to soft affinity CPUs subhra mazumdar
2019-07-02 17:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-17 3:01 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-07-18 11:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-19 2:55 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-06-26 22:47 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] sched: introduce tunables to control soft affinity subhra mazumdar
2019-07-18 10:08 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2019-07-19 7:23 ` Subhra Mazumdar [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=81034dd8-4074-e716-c3e8-5a23cbb6bb8d@oracle.com \
--to=subhra.mazumdar@oracle.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=dhaval.giani@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=prakash.sangappa@oracle.com \
--cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/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
Powered by JetHome