mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kayra Cizmeci <kayracizmeci@gmail.com>
To: Zhan Xusheng <zhanxusheng1024@gmail.com>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com,
	tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com,  yu.c.chen@intel.com,
	kprateek.nayak@amd.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
	 vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
	rostedt@goodmis.org,  bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
	vschneid@redhat.com,  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	zhanxusheng@xiaomi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/cache: Check reduced capacity before alb_break_llc()
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2026 10:13:10 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <auLs7xeL9FsHcf-h@scheduler.schedules> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261029023650.3404429-1-zhanxusheng1024@gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 29, 2026 at 10:36:50AM +0800, Zhan Xusheng wrote:

Hi Zhan,

> From: Zhan Xusheng <zhanxusheng@xiaomi.com>
> 
> need_active_balance() moves the only CFS task off a CPU whose capacity
> is reduced, for example by IRQ load, to an idle CPU with more.
> alb_break_llc() runs first and refuses to move a lone task off its
> preferred LLC, so if no other CPU in that LLC is idle the task stays on
> the reduced CPU.  Like asym packing, which was moved ahead of
> alb_break_llc() for the same reason, this is a performance case that
> cache locality should not override.
> 
> With two LLCs of two CPUs, the other CPU of the task's LLC busy and 60%
> of the task's CPU spent in a hardirq, a CPU-bound two-thread process
> stayed there for 20 seconds at 38% of its normal throughput.  With this
> change it moves to the idle LLC within a second, as it does with cache
> aware scheduling disabled.

Sweet.

> 
> Fixes: 714059f79ff0 ("sched/cache: Handle moving single tasks to/from their preferred LLC")
> Signed-off-by: Zhan Xusheng <zhanxusheng@xiaomi.com>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/fair.c | 12 ++++++------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index cfc982205b98..e313c6d212c6 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -13585,12 +13585,6 @@ static int need_active_balance(struct lb_env *env)
>  	if (asym_active_balance(env))
>  		return 1;
>  
> -	if (alb_break_llc(env))
> -		return 0;
> -
> -	if (imbalanced_active_balance(env))
> -		return 1;
> -
>  	/*
>  	 * The dst_cpu is idle and the src_cpu CPU has only 1 CFS task.
>  	 * It's worth migrating the task if the src_cpu's capacity is reduced
> @@ -13604,6 +13598,12 @@ static int need_active_balance(struct lb_env *env)
>  			return 1;
>  	}
>  
> +	if (alb_break_llc(env))
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	if (imbalanced_active_balance(env))
> +		return 1;
> +
>  	if (env->migration_type == migrate_misfit ||
>  	    env->migration_type == migrate_llc_task)
>  		return 1;
> 
> base-commit: 65ba8f34ec886ec72b2c07ddc8cf3d815c32869d
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 

Well yeah. alb_break_llc() just returns true in the nr_running <= 1
case. FWIW, on my tip tree this just creates a conflict. On me
alb_break_llc() is first, then asym_active_balance() and then
imbalanced_active_balance(). I think in that case moving all three
functions would be better? (below this other block that's for this case)



Thanks,

Kayra


  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-29  7:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-29  2:36 Zhan Xusheng
2026-10-29  7:13 ` Kayra Cizmeci [this message]
2026-10-29  7:50   ` Zhan Xusheng
2026-10-29  8:13     ` Kayra Cizmeci
2026-10-29  8:18   ` Chen Yu
2026-10-29  8:18 ` Chen Yu
2026-10-29  8:55   ` Zhan Xusheng

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=auLs7xeL9FsHcf-h@scheduler.schedules \
    --to=kayracizmeci@gmail.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
    --cc=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=zhanxusheng1024@gmail.com \
    --cc=zhanxusheng@xiaomi.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®