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){
>
prev 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®