mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Zhang, Rui" <rui.zhang@intel.com>
To: "Lu, Aaron" <aaron.lu@intel.com>,
	"pierre.gondois@arm.com" <pierre.gondois@arm.com>
Cc: "peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
	"Pandruvada, Srinivas" <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com>,
	"vincent.guittot@linaro.org" <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"dietmar.eggemann@arm.com" <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	"tj@kernel.org" <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Skip cpus with no sched domain attached during NOHZ idle balance
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2023 09:23:18 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a2a16c0e198a6d722b8923b0eec15dd2b32e4320.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c8baa176-e4cd-41f6-35a9-c69f89b32e79@arm.com>

Hi, Pierre,

> 
> Yes right indeed,
> This happens when putting a CPU offline (as you mentioned earlier,
> putting a CPU offline clears the CPU in the idle_cpus_mask).
> 
> The load balancing related variables

including?

>  are unused if a CPU has a NULL
> rq as it cannot pull any task. Ideally we should clear them once,
> when attaching a NULL sd to the CPU.

This sounds good to me. But TBH, I don't have enough confidence to do
so because I'm not crystal clear about how these variables are used.

Some questions about the code below.
> 
> The following snipped should do that and solve the issue you
> mentioned:
> --- snip ---
> --- a/include/linux/sched/nohz.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/nohz.h
> @@ -9,8 +9,10 @@
>   #if defined(CONFIG_SMP) && defined(CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON)
>   extern void nohz_balance_enter_idle(int cpu);
>   extern int get_nohz_timer_target(void);
> +extern void nohz_clean_sd_state(int cpu);
>   #else
>   static inline void nohz_balance_enter_idle(int cpu) { }
> +static inline void nohz_clean_sd_state(int cpu) { }
>   #endif
>   
>   #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index b3e25be58e2b..6fcabe5d08f5 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -11525,6 +11525,9 @@ void nohz_balance_exit_idle(struct rq *rq)
>   {
>          SCHED_WARN_ON(rq != this_rq());
>   
> +       if (on_null_domain(rq))
> +               return;
> +
>          if (likely(!rq->nohz_tick_stopped))
>                  return;
> 
if we force clearing rq->nohz_tick_stopped when detaching domain, why
bother adding the first check?

>   
> @@ -11551,6 +11554,17 @@ static void set_cpu_sd_state_idle(int cpu)
>          rcu_read_unlock();
>   }
>   
> +void nohz_clean_sd_state(int cpu) {
> +       struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> +
> +       rq->nohz_tick_stopped = 0;
> +       if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, nohz.idle_cpus_mask)) {
> +               cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, nohz.idle_cpus_mask);
> +               atomic_dec(&nohz.nr_cpus);
> +       }
> +       set_cpu_sd_state_idle(cpu);
> +}
> +

detach_destroy_domains
	cpu_attach_domain
		update_top_cache_domain

as we clears per_cpu(sd_llc, cpu) for the isolated cpu in
cpu_attach_domain(), set_cpu_sd_state_idle() seems to be a no-op here,
no?

thanks,
rui
>   /*
>    * This routine will record that the CPU is going idle with tick
> stopped.
>    * This info will be used in performing idle load balancing in the
> future.
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/topology.c b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> index d3a3b2646ec4..d31137b5f0ce 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/topology.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> @@ -2584,8 +2584,10 @@ static void detach_destroy_domains(const
> struct cpumask *cpu_map)
>                 
> static_branch_dec_cpuslocked(&sched_asym_cpucapacity);
>   
>          rcu_read_lock();
> -       for_each_cpu(i, cpu_map)
> +       for_each_cpu(i, cpu_map) {
>                  cpu_attach_domain(NULL, &def_root_domain, i);
> +               nohz_clean_sd_state(i);
> +       }
>          rcu_read_unlock();
>   }
> 
> --- snip ---
> 
> Regards,
> Pierre
> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > > +       }
> > > > +
> > > >           /*
> > > >            * The tick is still stopped but load could have been
> > > > added in the
> > > >            * meantime. We set the nohz.has_blocked flag to trig
> > > > a
> > > > check of the
> > > > @@ -11585,10 +11609,6 @@ void nohz_balance_enter_idle(int cpu)
> > > >           if (rq->nohz_tick_stopped)
> > > >                   goto out;
> > > > -       /* If we're a completely isolated CPU, we don't play:
> > > > */
> > > > -       if (on_null_domain(rq))
> > > > -               return;
> > > > -
> > > >           rq->nohz_tick_stopped = 1;
> > > >           cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, nohz.idle_cpus_mask);
> > > > 
> > > > Otherwise I could reproduce the issue and the patch was solving
> > > > it,
> > > > so:
> > > > Tested-by: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@arm.com>
> > 
> > Thanks for testing, really appreciated!
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Also, your patch doesn't aim to solve that, but I think there
> > > > is an
> > > > issue
> > > > when updating cpuset.cpus when an isolated partition was
> > > > already
> > > > created:
> > > > 
> > > > // Create an isolated partition containing CPU0
> > > > # mkdir cgroup
> > > > # mount -t cgroup2 none cgroup/
> > > > # mkdir cgroup/Testing
> > > > # echo "+cpuset" > cgroup/cgroup.subtree_control
> > > > # echo "+cpuset" > cgroup/Testing/cgroup.subtree_control
> > > > # echo 0 > cgroup/Testing/cpuset.cpus
> > > > # echo isolated > cgroup/Testing/cpuset.cpus.partition
> > > > 
> > > > // CPU0's sched domain is detached:
> > > > # ls /sys/kernel/debug/sched/domains/cpu0/
> > > > # ls /sys/kernel/debug/sched/domains/cpu1/
> > > > domain0  domain1
> > > > 
> > > > // Change the isolated partition to be CPU1
> > > > # echo 1 > cgroup/Testing/cpuset.cpus
> > > > 
> > > > // CPU[0-1] sched domains are not updated:
> > > > # ls /sys/kernel/debug/sched/domains/cpu0/
> > > > # ls /sys/kernel/debug/sched/domains/cpu1/
> > > > domain0  domain1
> > > > 
> > Interesting. Let me check and get back to you later on this. :)
> > 
> > thanks,
> > rui


  reply	other threads:[~2023-09-14  9:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-08-04  9:08 Zhang Rui
2023-08-09  7:00 ` Chen Yu
2023-08-11  8:49   ` Zhang, Rui
2023-08-14  3:14 ` Aaron Lu
2023-08-14  8:30   ` Zhang, Rui
2023-09-08  9:43     ` Pierre Gondois
2023-09-11 11:42       ` Aaron Lu
2023-09-11 16:23         ` Zhang, Rui
2023-09-12 14:32           ` Pierre Gondois
2023-09-14  9:23             ` Zhang, Rui [this message]
2023-09-14 14:53               ` Pierre Gondois
2023-09-20  7:24                 ` Zhang, Rui
2023-09-22 15:03                   ` Pierre Gondois
2023-11-15 20:01                   ` Vincent Guittot
2023-11-16  7:31                     ` Zhang, Rui

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=a2a16c0e198a6d722b8923b0eec15dd2b32e4320.camel@intel.com \
    --to=rui.zhang@intel.com \
    --cc=aaron.lu@intel.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pierre.gondois@arm.com \
    --cc=srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®