mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Chen, Yu C" <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
To: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	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>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Libo Chen <libo.chen@oracle.com>,
	Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>,
	Madadi Vineeth Reddy <vineethr@linux.ibm.com>,
	Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>, Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>,
	K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
	"Gautham R . Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC patch v3 14/20] sched: Introduce update_llc_busiest() to deal with groups having preferred LLC tasks
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2025 10:26:30 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <99c296f4-35bf-4427-95e8-0cdcc423f999@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <736d41f0-1eb4-4420-ab67-e88fc7e31bda@linux.ibm.com>

On 7/4/2025 3:52 AM, Shrikanth Hegde wrote:
> 
> 
> On 6/18/25 23:58, Tim Chen wrote:
>> The load balancer attempts to identify the busiest sched_group with
>> the highest load and migrates some tasks to a less busy sched_group
>> to distribute the load across different CPUs.
>>
>> When cache-aware scheduling is enabled, the busiest sched_group is
>> defined as the one with the highest number of tasks preferring to run
>> on the destination LLC. If the busiest group has llc_balance tag,
>> the cache aware load balance will be launched.
>>
>> Introduce the helper function update_llc_busiest() to identify
>> such sched group with most tasks preferring the destination LLC.
>>
>> Co-developed-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>>   kernel/sched/fair.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>   1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index 48a090c6e885..ab3d1239d6e4 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -10848,12 +10848,36 @@ static inline bool llc_balance(struct lb_env 
>> *env, struct sg_lb_stats *sgs,
>>       return false;
>>   }
>> +
>> +static bool update_llc_busiest(struct lb_env *env,
>> +                   struct sg_lb_stats *busiest,
>> +                   struct sg_lb_stats *sgs)
>> +{
>> +    int idx;
>> +
>> +    /* Only the candidate with llc_balance need to be taken care of */
>> +    if (!sgs->group_llc_balance)
>> +        return false;
>> +
>> +    /*
>> +     * There are more tasks that want to run on dst_cpu's LLC.
>> +     */
>> +    idx = llc_idx(env->dst_cpu);
>> +    return sgs->nr_pref_llc[idx] > busiest->nr_pref_llc[idx];
>> +}
>>   #else
>>   static inline bool llc_balance(struct lb_env *env, struct 
>> sg_lb_stats *sgs,
>>                      struct sched_group *group)
>>   {
>>       return false;
>>   }
>> +
>> +static bool update_llc_busiest(struct lb_env *env,
>> +                   struct sg_lb_stats *busiest,
>> +                   struct sg_lb_stats *sgs)
>> +{
>> +    return false;
>> +}
>>   #endif
>>   static inline long sibling_imbalance(struct lb_env *env,
>> @@ -11085,6 +11109,14 @@ static bool update_sd_pick_busiest(struct 
>> lb_env *env,
>>            sds->local_stat.group_type != group_has_spare))
>>           return false;
>> +    /* deal with prefer LLC load balance, if failed, fall into normal 
>> load balance */
>> +    if (update_llc_busiest(env, busiest, sgs))
>> +        return true;
>> +
>> +    /* if there is already a busy group, skip the normal load balance */
>> +    if (busiest->group_llc_balance)
>> +        return false;
>> +
> 
> If you had a group which was group_overloaded but it could have 
> group_llc_balance right?

Yes.

> In this case the priorities based on group_type is not followed no?
> 

Currently, group_llc_balance appears to take precedence over the
normal group_type. The setting of group_llc_balance is determined by
_get_migrate_hint(). We've made efforts to set this flag carefully to
avoid disrupting the normal load balancing.

For example, group_llc_balance won't be enabled when both the destination
LLC and source LLC surpass 50% of the average utilization. As for
group_overloaded, its threshold is set at 85% utilization 
(imbalance_pct=117).
So in this case, the group_overloaded would be honored.

>>       if (sgs->group_type > busiest->group_type)
>>           return true;
>> @@ -11991,9 +12023,11 @@ static struct sched_group 
>> *sched_balance_find_src_group(struct lb_env *env)
>>       /*
>>        * Try to move all excess tasks to a sibling domain of the busiest
>>        * group's child domain.
>> +     * Also do so if we can move some tasks that prefer the local LLC.
>>        */
>>       if (sds.prefer_sibling && local->group_type == group_has_spare &&
>> -        sibling_imbalance(env, &sds, busiest, local) > 1)
>> +        (busiest->group_llc_balance ||
>> +        sibling_imbalance(env, &sds, busiest, local) > 1))
>>           goto force_balance;
>>       if (busiest->group_type != group_overloaded) {
> 
> Also, This load balancing happening due to llc could be very tricky to 
> debug.
> Any stats added to schedstat or sched/debug?

OK, we can add some in the next version.

Thanks,
Chenyu

  reply	other threads:[~2025-07-05  2:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-18 18:27 [RFC patch v3 00/20] Cache aware scheduling Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 01/20] sched: Cache aware load-balancing Tim Chen
2025-06-26 12:23   ` Jianyong Wu
2025-06-26 13:32     ` Chen, Yu C
2025-06-27  0:10       ` Tim Chen
2025-06-27  2:13         ` Jianyong Wu
2025-07-03 19:29   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-04  8:40     ` Chen, Yu C
2025-07-04  8:45       ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-07-04  8:54         ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-07 19:57     ` Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 02/20] sched: Several fixes for cache aware scheduling Tim Chen
2025-07-03 19:33   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-07 21:02     ` Tim Chen
2025-07-08  1:15   ` Libo Chen
2025-07-08  7:54     ` Chen, Yu C
2025-07-08 15:47       ` Libo Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 03/20] sched: Avoid task migration within its preferred LLC Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 04/20] sched: Avoid calculating the cpumask if the system is overloaded Tim Chen
2025-07-03 19:39   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-07 14:57     ` Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 05/20] sched: Add hysteresis to switch a task's preferred LLC Tim Chen
2025-07-02  6:47   ` Madadi Vineeth Reddy
2025-07-02 21:47     ` Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 06/20] sched: Save the per LLC utilization for better cache aware scheduling Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 07/20] sched: Add helper function to decide whether to allow " Tim Chen
2025-07-08  0:41   ` Libo Chen
2025-07-08  8:29     ` Chen, Yu C
2025-07-08 17:22       ` Libo Chen
2025-07-09 14:41         ` Chen, Yu C
2025-07-09 21:31           ` Libo Chen
2025-07-08 21:59     ` Tim Chen
2025-07-09 21:22       ` Libo Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 08/20] sched: Set up LLC indexing Tim Chen
2025-07-03 19:44   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-04  9:36     ` Chen, Yu C
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 09/20] sched: Introduce task preferred LLC field Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 10/20] sched: Calculate the number of tasks that have LLC preference on a runqueue Tim Chen
2025-07-03 19:45   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-04 15:00     ` Chen, Yu C
2025-06-18 18:27 ` [RFC patch v3 11/20] sched: Introduce per runqueue task LLC preference counter Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 12/20] sched: Calculate the total number of preferred LLC tasks during load balance Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 13/20] sched: Tag the sched group as llc_balance if it has tasks prefer other LLC Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 14/20] sched: Introduce update_llc_busiest() to deal with groups having preferred LLC tasks Tim Chen
2025-07-03 19:52   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-05  2:26     ` Chen, Yu C [this message]
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 15/20] sched: Introduce a new migration_type to track the preferred LLC load balance Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 16/20] sched: Consider LLC locality for active balance Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 17/20] sched: Consider LLC preference when picking tasks from busiest queue Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 18/20] sched: Do not migrate task if it is moving out of its preferred LLC Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 19/20] sched: Introduce SCHED_CACHE_LB to control cache aware load balance Tim Chen
2025-06-18 18:28 ` [RFC patch v3 20/20] sched: Introduce SCHED_CACHE_WAKE to control LLC aggregation on wake up Tim Chen
2025-06-19  6:39 ` [RFC patch v3 00/20] Cache aware scheduling Yangyu Chen
2025-06-19 13:21   ` Chen, Yu C
2025-06-19 14:12     ` Yangyu Chen
2025-06-20 19:25 ` Madadi Vineeth Reddy
2025-06-22  0:39   ` Chen, Yu C
2025-06-24 17:47     ` Madadi Vineeth Reddy
2025-06-23 16:45   ` Tim Chen
2025-06-24  5:00 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-06-24 12:16   ` Chen, Yu C
2025-06-25  4:19     ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-06-25  0:30   ` Tim Chen
2025-06-25  4:30     ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-07-03 20:00   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-04 10:09     ` Chen, Yu C
2025-07-09 19:39 ` Madadi Vineeth Reddy
2025-07-10  3:33   ` Chen, Yu C

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=99c296f4-35bf-4427-95e8-0cdcc423f999@intel.com \
    --to=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
    --cc=hdanton@sina.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --cc=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=libo.chen@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vineethr@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
    --cc=wuyun.abel@bytedance.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®