mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
To: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	David Vernet <void@manifault.com>,
	Changwoo Min <changwoo@igalia.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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] sched_ext: Choose prev_cpu if idle and cache affine without WF_SYNC
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 23:44:44 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <828a9227-6a42-4bc8-a55e-fda9febe6e82@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z9hZ9fgtGNd8DeEf@gpd3>



On 3/17/2025 6:20 PM, Andrea Righi wrote:
> Hi Joel,
> 
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 04:28:02AM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>> Consider that the previous CPU is cache affined to the waker's CPU and
>> is idle. Currently, scx's default select function only selects the
>> previous CPU in this case if WF_SYNC request is also made to wakeup on the
>> waker's CPU.
>>
>> This means, without WF_SYNC, the previous CPU being cache affined to the
>> waker and is idle is not considered. This seems extreme. WF_SYNC is not
>> normally passed to the wakeup path outside of some IPC drivers but it is
>> very possible that the task is cache hot on previous CPU and shares
>> cache with the waker CPU. Lets avoid too many migrations and select the
>> previous CPU in such cases.
>>
>> This change is consistent with the fair scheduler's behavior as well. In
>> select_idle_sibling(), the previous CPU is selected if it is cache
>> affined with the target. This is done regardless of WF_SYNC and before
>> any scanning of fully idle cores is done.
>>
>> One difference still exists though between SCX and CFS in this regard, in CFS
>> we first check if the target CPU is idle before checking if the previous CPU is
>> idle. However that could be a matter of choice and in the future, that behavior
>> could also be unified.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
>> ---
>>  kernel/sched/ext.c | 24 +++++++++++-------------
>>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/ext.c b/kernel/sched/ext.c
>> index 5a81d9a1e31f..3b1a489e2aaf 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/ext.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/ext.c
>> @@ -3479,7 +3479,7 @@ static s32 scx_select_cpu_dfl(struct task_struct *p, s32 prev_cpu,
>>  {
>>  	const struct cpumask *llc_cpus = NULL;
>>  	const struct cpumask *numa_cpus = NULL;
>> -	s32 cpu;
>> +	s32 cpu = smp_processor_id();
>>  
>>  	*found = false;
>>  
>> @@ -3507,22 +3507,20 @@ static s32 scx_select_cpu_dfl(struct task_struct *p, s32 prev_cpu,
>>  			llc_cpus = llc_span(prev_cpu);
>>  	}
>>  
>> +	/*
>> +	 * If the waker's CPU is cache affine and prev_cpu is idle, then avoid
>> +	 * a migration.
>> +	 */
>> +	if (cpus_share_cache(cpu, prev_cpu) &&
>> +		test_and_clear_cpu_idle(prev_cpu)) {
>> +		cpu = prev_cpu;
>> +		goto cpu_found;
>> +	}
>> +
> 
> One potential issue that I see is that when SMT is enabled, you may end up
> using prev_cpu also when the other sibling is busy. Maybe we should check
> if prev_cpu is set in the SMT idle cpumask.

Hmm so you're suggesting select previous if it is part of a fully idle core
*and* shares cache with the waker.

That does sound reasonable to me, will look more into it, thanks.

 - Joel


      reply	other threads:[~2025-03-17 22:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-17  8:28 Joel Fernandes
2025-03-17 17:08 ` Tejun Heo
2025-03-17 17:30   ` Andrea Righi
2025-03-17 17:44     ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-03-18  5:17       ` Andrea Righi
2025-03-17 22:11     ` Joel Fernandes
2025-03-18  5:09       ` Andrea Righi
2025-03-18 17:00         ` Joel Fernandes
2025-03-18 17:46           ` Andrea Righi
2025-03-18 22:37             ` Joel Fernandes
2025-03-17 22:07   ` Joel Fernandes
2025-03-17 22:25     ` Tejun Heo
2025-03-17 22:45       ` Joel Fernandes
2025-03-18  0:12   ` Libo Chen
2025-03-18  0:14     ` Tejun Heo
2025-03-17 17:20 ` Andrea Righi
2025-03-17 22:44   ` Joel Fernandes [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=828a9227-6a42-4bc8-a55e-fda9febe6e82@nvidia.com \
    --to=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
    --cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=void@manifault.com \
    --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®