From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
To: Luo Gengkun <luogengkun@huaweicloud.com>,
peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, yu.c.chen@intel.com
Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, vschneid@redhat.com,
kprateek.nayak@amd.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/2] sched/cache: Reduce the overhead of task_cache_work by only scan the visisted cpus
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2026 14:46:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <995dc27d9bd27276c1fbf729ed88b7e6c91172f7.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261009032943.95091-2-luogengkun@huaweicloud.com>
On Fri, 2026-10-09 at 03:29 +0000, Luo Gengkun wrote:
> The overhead of task_cache_work() is high, especially in multi-NUMA systems.
> Currently, task_cache_work() tries to find the pref_llc by scanning all CPUs
> in the system. However, most of these scans are meaningless, such as those
> for CPUs that have never been visited or were accessed a long time ago.
>
> To address this problem, introduce visited_cpus to track the visited CPUs
> and evict them once they have not been accessed for a duration exceeding
> llc_epoch_affinity_timeout.
>
> Now that we know exactly which CPUs to scan from visited_cpus, we can remove
> get_scan_cpumasks().
The patch mostly looks good. Some minor nits below.
>
> Signed-off-by: Luo Gengkun <luogengkun@huaweicloud.com>
> ---
> include/linux/sched.h | 2 +
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 117 +++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
> 2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 64 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index d35ae49a991f..09bd18c7a667 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -2404,6 +2404,7 @@ static __always_inline int task_mm_cid(struct task_struct *t)
> struct sched_cache_time {
> u64 runtime;
> unsigned long epoch;
> + unsigned long epoch_last_visit;
> };
>
> struct sched_cache_group {
> @@ -2416,6 +2417,7 @@ struct sched_cache_group {
> int cpu;
> refcount_t refcnt;
> struct rcu_head rcu;
> + cpumask_var_t visited_cpus;
> } ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
>
> struct sched_cache_group *sched_cache_group_get(struct sched_cache_group *grp);
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 57360f5cdde4..691b4ecdb2e7 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -1656,11 +1656,11 @@ int mm_init_sched(struct mm_struct *mm,
> int i;
>
> grp = kzalloc_obj(*grp);
> - if (!grp) {
> - free_percpu(_pcpu_sched);
> - mm->sched_cache_grp = NULL;
> - return -ENOMEM;
> - }
> + if (!grp)
> + goto err_free_pcpu;
> +
> + if (!zalloc_cpumask_var(&grp->visited_cpus, GFP_KERNEL))
> + goto err_free_grp;
>
> for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
> struct sched_cache_time *pcpu_sched = per_cpu_ptr(_pcpu_sched, i);
> @@ -1669,6 +1669,7 @@ int mm_init_sched(struct mm_struct *mm,
> pcpu_sched->runtime = 0;
> /* a slightly stale cpu epoch is acceptible */
> pcpu_sched->epoch = rq->cpu_epoch;
> + pcpu_sched->epoch_last_visit = rq->cpu_epoch;
> epoch = rq->cpu_epoch;
> }
>
> @@ -1694,6 +1695,14 @@ int mm_init_sched(struct mm_struct *mm,
> */
> smp_store_release(&mm->sched_cache_grp, grp);
> return 0;
> +
> +err_free_grp:
> + kfree(grp);
> +
> +err_free_pcpu:
> + free_percpu(_pcpu_sched);
> + mm->sched_cache_grp = NULL;
> + return -ENOMEM;
> }
>
> static void sched_cache_group_free_rcu(struct rcu_head *rcu)
> @@ -1702,6 +1711,7 @@ static void sched_cache_group_free_rcu(struct rcu_head *rcu)
> container_of(rcu, struct sched_cache_group, rcu);
>
> free_percpu(grp->pcpu_sched);
> + free_cpumask_var(grp->visited_cpus);
> kfree(grp);
> }
>
> @@ -1842,13 +1852,23 @@ static inline void __update_mm_sched(struct rq *rq,
> }
> }
>
> -static unsigned long fraction_mm_sched(struct rq *rq,
> - struct sched_cache_time *pcpu_sched)
> +static unsigned long fraction_mm_sched(int cpu,
> + struct sched_cache_group *grp)
> {
> + struct sched_cache_time *pcpu_sched =
> + per_cpu_ptr(grp->pcpu_sched, cpu);
> + struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> +
> guard(raw_spinlock_irqsave)(&rq->cpu_epoch_lock);
>
> __update_mm_sched(rq, pcpu_sched);
>
> + /* Skip the rq that has not been hit for a long time */
> + if ((rq->cpu_epoch - pcpu_sched->epoch_last_visit) > llc_epoch_affinity_timeout) {
Suggest updating comment to below as it does more than
skip: it clears the visited cpus bit. Also break the long line.
/* Evict the CPU if this sched group has not run on it for a while */
if ((rq->cpu_epoch - pcpu_sched->epoch_last_visit) >
llc_epoch_affinity_timeout) {
> + cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, grp->visited_cpus);
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> /*
> * Runtime is a geometric series (r=0.5) and as such will sum to twice
> * the accumulation period, this means the multiplcation here should
> @@ -1924,6 +1944,9 @@ void account_mm_sched(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, s64 delta_exec)
> pcpu_sched->runtime += delta_exec;
> rq->cpu_runtime += delta_exec;
> epoch = rq->cpu_epoch;
> + pcpu_sched->epoch_last_visit = epoch;
> + if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu_of(rq), grp->visited_cpus))
> + cpumask_set_cpu(cpu_of(rq), grp->visited_cpus);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -1974,52 +1997,6 @@ static void task_tick_cache(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> }
> }
>
> -static void get_scan_cpumasks(cpumask_var_t cpus, struct task_struct *p,
> - struct sched_cache_group *grp)
> -{
> -#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING
> - int cpu, curr_cpu, nid, pref_nid;
> -
> - if (!static_branch_likely(&sched_numa_balancing))
> - goto out;
> -
> - cpu = READ_ONCE(grp->cpu);
> - if (cpu != -1)
> - nid = cpu_to_node(cpu);
> - curr_cpu = task_cpu(p);
> -
> - /*
> - * Scanning in the preferred NUMA node is ideal. However, the NUMA
> - * preferred node is per-task rather than per-process. It is possible
> - * for different threads of the process to have distinct preferred
> - * nodes; consequently, the process-wide preferred LLC may bounce
> - * between different nodes. As a workaround, maintain the scan
> - * CPU mask to also cover the process's current preferred LLC and the
> - * current running node to mitigate the bouncing risk.
> - * TBD: numa_group should be considered during task aggregation.
> - */
> - pref_nid = p->numa_preferred_nid;
> - /* honor the task's preferred node */
> - if (pref_nid == NUMA_NO_NODE)
> - goto out;
> -
> - cpumask_or(cpus, cpus, cpumask_of_node(pref_nid));
> -
> - /* honor the task's preferred LLC CPU */
> - if (cpu != -1 && !cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, cpus) && nid != NUMA_NO_NODE)
> - cpumask_or(cpus, cpus, cpumask_of_node(nid));
> -
> - /* make sure the task's current running node is included */
> - if (!cpumask_test_cpu(curr_cpu, cpus))
> - cpumask_or(cpus, cpus, cpumask_of_node(cpu_to_node(curr_cpu)));
> -
> - return;
> -
> -out:
> -#endif
> - cpumask_copy(cpus, cpu_online_mask);
> -}
> -
> static inline void update_avg_scale(u64 *avg, u64 sample)
> {
> int factor = per_cpu(sd_llc_size, raw_smp_processor_id());
> @@ -2068,7 +2045,7 @@ static void task_cache_work(struct callback_head *work)
> if (time_before(now, next_scan))
> return;
>
> - /* only 1 thread is allowed to scan */
> + /* elect a single scanner per epoch */
> if (!try_cmpxchg(&grp->next_scan, &next_scan,
> now + max_t(unsigned long,
> READ_ONCE(llc_epoch_period), 1)))
> @@ -2089,7 +2066,18 @@ static void task_cache_work(struct callback_head *work)
> scoped_guard (cpus_read_lock) {
> guard(rcu)();
>
> - get_scan_cpumasks(cpus, p, grp);
> + /*
> + * Data race: While evaluating the visited_cpus without
> + * a lock, a CPU could be concurrently set by
> + * account_mm_sched(), meaning the scan might skip the newly
> + * visited CPU if the bit changes during the scan. This is
> + * a deliberate trade-off between accuracy and efficiency:
> + * locking would prevent this race but incur extra overhead.
> + * The missed runtime contribution is negligible because it
> + * implies this process hasn't run on that CPU for a long
> + * time, and will be captured in the next cycle.
> + */
Maybe we can shorten the comments to:
/*
* account_mm_sched() can set a bit in visited_cpus while
* it is read here locklessly for efficiency. A CPU missed this way has
* only just been used by this sched group, so its share is
* small, and the next scan will include it.
*/
> + cpumask_and(cpus, cpu_online_mask, grp->visited_cpus);
>
> for_each_cpu(cpu, cpus) {
> /* XXX sched_cluster_active */
> @@ -2100,15 +2088,7 @@ static void task_cache_work(struct callback_head *work)
> if (!sd)
> continue;
>
> - for_each_cpu(i, sched_domain_span(sd)) {
> - occ = fraction_mm_sched(cpu_rq(i),
> - per_cpu_ptr(grp->pcpu_sched, i));
> - a_occ += occ;
> - if (occ > m_occ) {
> - m_occ = occ;
> - m_cpu = i;
> - }
> -
> + for_each_cpu_and(i, sched_domain_span(sd), cpus) {
> /*
> * rcu_access_pointer() is used because the
> * pointer is only compared, never dereferenced.
> @@ -2117,6 +2097,15 @@ static void task_cache_work(struct callback_head *work)
> if (cur && !(cur->flags & (PF_EXITING | PF_KTHREAD)) &&
> rcu_access_pointer(cur->sched_cache_grp) == grp)
> nr_running++;
> +
> + occ = fraction_mm_sched(i, grp);
> + if (occ == 0)
> + continue;
> + a_occ += occ;
> + if (occ > m_occ) {
The continue does nothing. When occ is 0, "a_occ += occ" adds nothing
and "occ > m_occ" is false. If you remove it, the nr_running block can
stay where it was, and this hunk becomes just a two-line change.
- for_each_cpu_and(i, sched_domain_span(sd), cpus) {
- occ = fraction_mm_sched(i, grp);
+ for_each_cpu(i, sched_domain_span(sd)) {
+ occ = fraction_mm_sched(cpu_rq(i),
+ per_cpu_ptr(grp->pcpu_sched, i));
Thanks.
Tim
> + m_occ = occ;
> + m_cpu = i;
> + }
> }
>
> /*
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-21 21:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-09 3:29 [PATCH v10 0/2] Cache aware scheduling: Reduce the overhead of task_cache_work Luo Gengkun
2026-10-09 3:29 ` [PATCH v10 1/2] sched/cache: Reduce the overhead of task_cache_work by only scan the visisted cpus Luo Gengkun
2026-10-21 4:30 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-10-21 16:26 ` Chen Yu
2026-10-21 21:46 ` Tim Chen [this message]
2026-10-09 3:29 ` [PATCH v10 2/2] -- DO NOT APPLY!!! -- sched/cache/debug: Add trace event and sched feature to track scan cost Luo Gengkun
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=995dc27d9bd27276c1fbf729ed88b7e6c91172f7.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=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luogengkun@huaweicloud.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 \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.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®