mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Shubhang <sh@gentwo.org>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	 shubhang@os.amperecomputing.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	 Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,  Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
	 Shijie Huang <Shijie.Huang@amperecomputing.com>,
	 Frank Wang <zwang@amperecomputing.com>
Cc: Christopher Lameter <cl@gentwo.org>,
	Adam Li <adam.li@amperecomputing.com>,
	 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Prefer cache-hot prev_cpu for wakeup
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2025 09:35:23 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d1cbc53d-d4cf-bc5a-6468-89e9a1d86f33@gentwo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c22de852-f2f6-48d7-831f-ca2a06365783@arm.com>

The system is an 80 core Ampere Altra with a two-level
sched domain topology. The MC domain contains all 80 cores.

I agree that placing the condition earlier in `select_idle_sibling()` 
aligns better with convention. I will move the check (EAS Aware) to the 
top of the function and submit a v2 patch.

Best,
Shubhang Kaushik

On Thu, 30 Oct 2025, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:

> On 18.10.25 01:00, Shubhang Kaushik via B4 Relay wrote:
>> From: Shubhang Kaushik <shubhang@os.amperecomputing.com>
>>
>> Modify the wakeup path in `select_task_rq_fair()` to prioritize cache
>> locality for waking tasks. The previous fast path always attempted to
>> find an idle sibling, even if the task's prev CPU was not truly busy.
>>
>> The original problem was that under some circumstances, this could lead
>> to unnecessary task migrations away from a cache-hot core, even when
>> the task's prev CPU was a suitable candidate. The scheduler's internal
>> mechanism `cpu_overutilized()` provide an evaluation of CPU load.
>>
>> To address this, the wakeup heuristic is updated to check the status of
>> the task's `prev_cpu` first:
>> - If the `prev_cpu` is  not overutilized (as determined by
>>   `cpu_overutilized()`, via PELT), the task is woken up on
>>   its previous CPU. This leverages cache locality and avoids
>>   a potentially unnecessary migration.
>> - If the `prev_cpu` is considered busy or overutilized, the scheduler
>>   falls back to the existing behavior of searching for an idle sibling.
>
> How does you sched domain topology look like? How many CPUs do you have
> in your MC domain?
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shubhang Kaushik <shubhang@os.amperecomputing.com>
>> ---
>> This patch optimizes the scheduler's wakeup path to prioritize cache
>> locality by keeping a task on its previous CPU if it is not overutilized,
>> falling back to a sibling search only when necessary.
>> ---
>>  kernel/sched/fair.c | 11 ++++++++++-
>>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index bc0b7ce8a65d6bbe616953f530f7a02bb619537c..bb0d28d7d9872642cb5a4076caeb3ac9d8fe7bcd 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -8618,7 +8618,16 @@ select_task_rq_fair(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu, int wake_flags)
>>  		new_cpu = sched_balance_find_dst_cpu(sd, p, cpu, prev_cpu, sd_flag);
>>  	} else if (wake_flags & WF_TTWU) { /* XXX always ? */
>>  		/* Fast path */
>> -		new_cpu = select_idle_sibling(p, prev_cpu, new_cpu);
>> +
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Avoid wakeup on an overutilized CPU.
>> +		 * If the previous CPU is not overloaded, retain the same for cache locality.
>> +		 * Otherwise, search for an idle sibling.
>> +		 */
>> +		if (!cpu_overutilized(prev_cpu))
>> +			new_cpu = prev_cpu;
>
> IMHO, special conditions like this one are normally coded at the
> beginning of select_idle_sibling().
>
> [...]
>

  reply	other threads:[~2025-10-30 16:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-10-17 23:00 Shubhang Kaushik via B4 Relay
2025-10-20 12:36 ` Phil Auld
2025-10-22 16:45   ` Shubhang Kaushik OS
2025-10-22 16:54 ` Vincent Guittot
2025-10-28  7:29 ` kernel test robot
2025-10-29  4:17 ` kernel test robot
2025-10-30 10:14 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2025-10-30 16:35   ` Shubhang [this message]
2025-10-31 11:32     ` Dietmar Eggemann
2025-10-31 16:45       ` Shubhang Kaushik OS

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=d1cbc53d-d4cf-bc5a-6468-89e9a1d86f33@gentwo.org \
    --to=sh@gentwo.org \
    --cc=Shijie.Huang@amperecomputing.com \
    --cc=adam.li@amperecomputing.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=cl@gentwo.org \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=shubhang@os.amperecomputing.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
    --cc=zwang@amperecomputing.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®