From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] sched/fair: Improve fairness between cfs tasks
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 20:05:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <jhjeen26eu8.mognet@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200914100340.17608-1-vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Hi Vincent,
On 14/09/20 11:03, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> When the system doesn't have enough cycles for all tasks, the scheduler
> must ensure a fair split of those CPUs cycles between CFS tasks. The
> fairness of some use cases can't be solved with a static distribution of
> the tasks on the system and requires a periodic rebalancing of the system
> but this dynamic behavior is not always optimal and the fair distribution
> of the CPU's time is not always ensured.
>
> The patchset improves the fairness by decreasing the constraint for
> selecting migratable tasks with the number of failed load balance. This
> change enables then to decrease the imbalance threshold because 1st LB
> will try to migrate tasks that fully match the imbalance.
>
> Some tests results:
>
> - small 2 x 4 cores arm64 system
>
> hackbench -l (256000/#grp) -g #grp
>
> grp tip/sched/core +patchset improvement
> 1 1.420(+/- 11.72 %) 1.382(+/-10.50 %) 2.72 %
> 4 1.295(+/- 2.72 %) 1.218(+/- 2.97 %) 0.76 %
> 8 1.220(+/- 2.17 %) 1.218(+/- 1.60 %) 0.17 %
> 16 1.258(+/- 1.88 %) 1.250(+/- 1,78 %) 0.58 %
>
>
> fairness tests: run always running rt-app threads
> monitor the ratio between min/max work done by threads
>
> v5.9-rc1 w/ patchset
> 9 threads avg 78.3% (+/- 6.60%) 91.20% (+/- 2.44%)
> worst 68.6% 85.67%
>
> 11 threads avg 65.91% (+/- 8.26%) 91.34% (+/- 1.87%)
> worst 53.52% 87.26%
>
> - large 2 nodes x 28 cores x 4 threads arm64 system
>
> The hackbench tests that I usually run as well as the sp.C.x and lu.C.x
> tests with 224 threads have not shown any difference with a mix of less
> than 0.5% of improvements or regressions.
>
Few nitpicks from my end, but no major objections - this looks mostly
sane to me.
> Vincent Guittot (4):
> sched/fair: relax constraint on task's load during load balance
> sched/fair: reduce minimal imbalance threshold
> sched/fair: minimize concurrent LBs between domain level
> sched/fair: reduce busy load balance interval
>
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 7 +++++--
> kernel/sched/topology.c | 4 ++--
> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-15 19:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-14 10:03 Vincent Guittot
2020-09-14 10:03 ` [PATCH 1/4] sched/fair: relax constraint on task's load during load balance Vincent Guittot
2020-09-14 10:03 ` [PATCH 2/4] sched/fair: reduce minimal imbalance threshold Vincent Guittot
2020-09-15 19:04 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-09-16 6:53 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-09-16 8:33 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-09-14 10:03 ` [PATCH 3/4] sched/fair: minimize concurrent LBs between domain level Vincent Guittot
2020-09-15 19:04 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-09-16 6:54 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-09-14 10:03 ` [PATCH 4/4] sched/fair: reduce busy load balance interval Vincent Guittot
2020-09-15 9:11 ` Jiang Biao
2020-09-15 9:28 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-09-15 11:36 ` Jiang Biao
2020-09-15 12:42 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-09-16 1:14 ` Jiang Biao
2020-09-15 19:04 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-09-16 7:02 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-09-16 8:34 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-09-14 11:42 ` [PATCH 0/4] sched/fair: Improve fairness between cfs tasks peterz
2020-09-14 12:53 ` Phil Auld
2020-09-14 16:03 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-09-14 15:50 ` Mel Gorman
2020-09-14 16:04 ` Vincent Guittot
2020-09-18 16:39 ` Phil Auld
2020-09-18 17:27 ` Phil Auld
2020-09-15 19:05 ` Valentin Schneider [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=jhjeen26eu8.mognet@arm.com \
--to=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--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=vincent.guittot@linaro.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
Powered by JetHome