From: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>,
mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
maddy@linux.ibm.com, vschneid@redhat.com,
dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
jstultz@google.com, kprateek.nayak@amd.com,
huschle@linux.ibm.com, srikar@linux.ibm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] sched: cpu parked and push current task mechanism
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 11:47:34 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aDXelhCbIvKjZyqG@yury> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250527151020.GV24938@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 05:10:20PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 11:44:43PM +0530, Shrikanth Hegde wrote:
> > In a para-virtualised environment, there could be multiple
> > overcommitted VMs. i.e sum of virtual CPUs(vCPU) > physical CPU(pCPU).
> > When all such VMs request for cpu cycles at the same, it is not possible
> > to serve all of them. This leads to VM level preemptions and hence the
> > steal time.
> >
> > Bring the notion of CPU parked state which implies underlying pCPU may
> > not be available for use at this time. This means it is better to avoid
> > this vCPU. So when a CPU is marked as parked, one should vacate it as
> > soon as it can. So it is going to dynamic at runtime and can change
> > often.
>
> You've lost me here already. Why would pCPU not be available? Simply
> because it is running another vCPU? I would say this means the pCPU is
> available, its just doing something else.
>
> Not available to me means it is going offline or something like that.
>
> > In general, task level preemption(driven by VM) is less expensive than VM
> > level preemption(driven by hypervisor). So pack to less CPUs helps to
> > improve the overall workload throughput/latency.
>
> This seems to suggest you're 'parking' vCPUs, while above you seemed to
> suggest pCPU. More confusion.
>
> > cpu parking and need for cpu parking has been explained here as well [1]. Much
> > of the context explained in the cover letter there applies to this
> > problem context as well.
> > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250512115325.30022-1-huschle@linux.ibm.com/
>
> Yeah, totally not following any of that either :/
>
>
> Mostly I have only confusion and no idea what you're actually wanting to
> do.
My wild guess is that the idea is to not preempt the pCPU while running
a particular vCPU workload. But I agree, this should all be reworded and
explained better. I didn't understand this, either.
Thanks,
YUry
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-27 15:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-23 18:14 Shrikanth Hegde
2025-05-23 18:14 ` [RFC PATCH 1/5] cpumask: Introduce cpu parked mask Shrikanth Hegde
2025-05-27 15:06 ` Yury Norov
2025-06-23 8:10 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-05-23 18:14 ` [RFC PATCH 2/5] sched/core: Don't use parked cpu for selection Shrikanth Hegde
2025-05-27 14:59 ` Yury Norov
2025-05-27 17:35 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-05-23 18:14 ` [RFC PATCH 3/5] sched/fair: Don't use parked cpu for load balancing Shrikanth Hegde
2025-05-23 18:14 ` [RFC PATCH 4/5] sched/core: Push current task when cpu is parked Shrikanth Hegde
2025-05-23 18:14 ` [DEBUG PATCH 5/5] powerpc: Use manual hint for cpu parking Shrikanth Hegde
2025-05-27 15:10 ` [RFC PATCH 0/5] sched: cpu parked and push current task mechanism Peter Zijlstra
2025-05-27 15:47 ` Yury Norov [this message]
2025-05-27 17:30 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-02 4:25 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-02 14:22 ` Tobias Huschle
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=aDXelhCbIvKjZyqG@yury \
--to=yury.norov@gmail.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=huschle@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jstultz@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=srikar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--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®