mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
To: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: 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>,
	K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
	Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.ibm.com>,
	Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>, Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
	Lee Trager <ltrager@nvidia.com>, Vikram Sethi <vsethi@nvidia.com>,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched/topology: Add asymmetric SMT packing override
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2026 20:24:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aq2B612KT5JGdsaf@gpd4> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <97c99014-d488-4468-896a-decf55636fa5@linux.ibm.com>

Hi Shrikanth,

On Fri, Sep 18, 2026 at 07:44:25PM +0530, Shrikanth Hegde wrote:
> Hi Andrea,
> 
> On 9/17/26 7:35 PM, Andrea Righi wrote:
> > Architectures can use SD_ASYM_PACKING to describe preferred CPU ordering
> > at the SMT scheduling domain. Some systems benefit from the same policy,
> > but their firmware cannot currently describe the preference. Inferring
> > it from the CPU model would embed a platform-specific policy in the
> > kernel.
> > 
> > Add the sched_smt_asym_packing boot option to override SD_ASYM_PACKING
> > at the SMT level. Accept auto, on and off. Auto preserves the
> > architecture-provided topology and is also the default when the option
> > is absent. On and off force the flag without changing asymmetric packing
> > at higher topology levels.
> > 
> > Apply the override centrally to domains with SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY so it
> > also covers architectures with custom SMT topology callbacks, including
> > powerpc. When forced on, priority remains defined by
> > arch_asym_cpu_priority(). The weak default prefers lower-numbered
> > logical CPUs, while architecture overrides remain authoritative.
> > Siblings with equal priorities remain unordered.
> > 
> 
> Wasn't this a temporary solution you wanted until the firmware changes are
> sorted out? or something changed in between?
> 
> If yes, could you please capture that in changelog or in comment.

The firmware-described ACPI property remains the preferred long-term solution.
However, defining and validating the interface across firmware, Linux, and other
operating systems, as well as completing the ACPI standardization process, will
take some time.

The command-line option is intended as an interim workaround and as a fallback
for deployed systems whose firmware cannot be updated. It allows users to enable
the optimization independently of their firmware version. I agree that this
should be explained more clearly in the changelog.

> 
> > Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
> > ---
> >   .../admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt         | 11 +++++
> >   kernel/sched/topology.c                       | 49 +++++++++++++++++++
> >   2 files changed, 60 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> > index 33cd30996e47e..36c3b2e563441 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> > @@ -6799,6 +6799,17 @@ Kernel parameters
> >   			solution to mutex-based priority inversion.
> >   			Format: <bool>
> > +	sched_smt_asym_packing= [KNL,SMP]
> > +			Override asymmetric packing at the SMT scheduling domain.
> > +			Format: { auto | on | off }
> > +			auto: Preserve the architecture default. This is the
> > +			default when the option is omitted.
> > +			on: Force asymmetric packing at the SMT scheduling domain.
> > +			Idle CPU selection prefers siblings with a higher
> > +			architecture-defined priority. Siblings with equal
> > +			priorities remain unordered.
> > +			off: Ignore SMT sibling priorities.
> > +
> 
> Wasn't this option/parameter to come from arch specific file?

Will didn't like very much the idea of detecting this through an Olympus CPU
quirk and requested a firmware-described property instead. Therefore, we moved
to a boot-time override that avoids any Arm- or CPU-specific detection for now.

> 
> Isn't it going to be confusing for archs which don't benefit from asym packing at SMT,
> but now there is kernel parameter to say on.

That's a fair concern. Following Vincent's suggestion, I can drop the auto and
off values and retain only an explicit force option. Without the option, the
existing architecture-/firmware-provided topology is left unchanged.

Thanks,
-Andrea

> 
> >   	sched_verbose	[KNL,EARLY] Enables verbose scheduler debug messages.
> >   	schedstats=	[KNL,X86] Enable or disable scheduled statistics.
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/topology.c b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> > index 0248227d983a7..cdfcecf673fd7 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/topology.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> > @@ -32,6 +32,46 @@ static int __init sched_debug_setup(char *str)
> >   }
> >   early_param("sched_verbose", sched_debug_setup);
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_SMT
> > +enum sched_smt_asym_packing_mode {
> > +	SCHED_SMT_ASYM_PACKING_AUTO,
> > +	SCHED_SMT_ASYM_PACKING_ON,
> > +	SCHED_SMT_ASYM_PACKING_OFF,
> > +	SCHED_SMT_ASYM_PACKING_NR,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static enum sched_smt_asym_packing_mode sched_smt_asym_packing __read_mostly =
> > +	SCHED_SMT_ASYM_PACKING_AUTO;
> > +
> > +static const char * const sched_smt_asym_packing_modes[SCHED_SMT_ASYM_PACKING_NR] = {
> > +	[SCHED_SMT_ASYM_PACKING_AUTO]	= "auto",
> > +	[SCHED_SMT_ASYM_PACKING_ON]	= "on",
> > +	[SCHED_SMT_ASYM_PACKING_OFF]	= "off",
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int __init sched_smt_asym_packing_parse(const char *str)
> > +{
> > +	for (int mode = 0; mode < SCHED_SMT_ASYM_PACKING_NR; mode++) {
> > +		if (!strcmp(str, sched_smt_asym_packing_modes[mode]))
> > +			return mode;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	return -EINVAL;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int __init setup_sched_smt_asym_packing(char *str)
> > +{
> > +	int mode = sched_smt_asym_packing_parse(str);
> > +
> > +	if (mode < 0)
> > +		return 0;
> > +
> > +	sched_smt_asym_packing = mode;
> > +	return 1;
> > +}
> > +__setup("sched_smt_asym_packing=", setup_sched_smt_asym_packing);
> > +#endif
> > +
> >   static inline bool sched_debug(void)
> >   {
> >   	return sched_debug_verbose;
> > @@ -1950,6 +1990,15 @@ sd_init(struct sched_domain_topology_level *tl,
> >   	if (WARN_ONCE(sd_flags & ~TOPOLOGY_SD_FLAGS,
> >   		      "wrong sd_flags in topology description\n"))
> >   		sd_flags &= TOPOLOGY_SD_FLAGS;
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_SMT
> > +	if (sd_flags & SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY) {
> > +		if (sched_smt_asym_packing == SCHED_SMT_ASYM_PACKING_ON)
> > +			sd_flags |= SD_ASYM_PACKING;
> > +		else if (sched_smt_asym_packing ==
> > +			 SCHED_SMT_ASYM_PACKING_OFF)
> > +			sd_flags &= ~SD_ASYM_PACKING;
> > +	}
> > +#endif
> >   	sd_flags |= asym_cpu_capacity_classify(sd_span, cpu_map);
> >   	*sd = (struct sched_domain){
> 

      parent reply	other threads:[~2026-09-18 18:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-17 14:05 [PATCH v6 0/2] sched: Enable preferred SMT siblings on NVIDIA Olympus Andrea Righi
2026-09-17 14:05 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched/fair: Honor asymmetric SMT priority in idle selection Andrea Righi
2026-09-17 16:55   ` Kayra Cizmeci
2026-09-18  6:28     ` Kayra Cizmeci
2026-09-18 15:58   ` Vincent Guittot
2026-09-17 14:05 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched/topology: Add asymmetric SMT packing override Andrea Righi
2026-09-18 14:14   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-09-18 16:03     ` Vincent Guittot
2026-09-18 18:27       ` Andrea Righi
2026-09-18 18:24     ` Andrea Righi [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=aq2B612KT5JGdsaf@gpd4 \
    --to=arighi@nvidia.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=christian.loehle@arm.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --cc=leitao@debian.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ltrager@nvidia.com \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=pauld@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=srikar@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
    --cc=vsethi@nvidia.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.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®