From: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.comi>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri@intel.com>,
Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>,
"Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@intel.com>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] sched/fair: Consider SMT in ASYM_PACKING load balance
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 22:12:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210409051229.GA26235@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YG7kr0Gyj86sMBF8@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 01:10:39PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 04:17:10PM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 01:17:28PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 05, 2021 at 09:11:07PM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote:
> > > > @@ -8507,6 +8619,10 @@ static bool update_sd_pick_busiest(struct lb_env *env,
> > > > if (!sgs->sum_h_nr_running)
> > > > return false;
> > > >
> > > > + if (sgs->group_type == group_asym_packing &&
> > > > + !asym_can_pull_tasks(env->dst_cpu, sds, sgs, sg))
> > > > + return false;
> > >
> > > All of this makes my head hurt; but afaict this isn't right.
> > >
> > > Your update_sg_lb_stats() change makes that we unconditionally set
> > > sgs->group_asym_packing, and then this is to undo that. But it's not
> > > clear this covers all cases right.
> >
> > We could not make a decision to set sgs->group_asym_packing in
> > update_sg_lb_stats() because we don't have information about the dst_cpu
> > and its SMT siblings if any. That is the reason I proposed to delay the
> > decision to update_sd_pick_busiest(), where we can compare local and
> > sgs.
>
> Yeah, I sorta got that.
>
> > > Even if !sched_asym_prefer(), we could end up selecting this sg as
> > > busiest, but you're just bailing out here.
> >
> > Even if sgs->group_asym_packing is unconditionally set, sgs can still
> > be classified as group_overloaded and group_imbalanced. In such cases
> > we wouldn't bailout. sgs could not be classified as group_fully_busy
> > or group_has_spare and we would bailout, though. Is your concern about
> > these? I can fixup these two cases.
>
> Yes. Either explain (in a comment) why those cases are not relevant, or
> handle them properly.
>
> Because when reading this, it wasn't at all obvious that this is correct
> or as intended.
Sure Peter, I will post a v2 handling the remaining cases properly.
Thanks and BR,
Ricardo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-09 5:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-06 4:11 [PATCH 0/4] sched/fair: Fix load balancing of SMT siblings with ASYM_PACKING Ricardo Neri
2021-04-06 4:11 ` [PATCH 1/4] sched/fair: Optimize checking for group_asym_packing Ricardo Neri
2021-04-06 4:11 ` [PATCH 2/4] sched/fair: Introduce arch_sched_asym_prefer_early() Ricardo Neri
2021-04-06 14:31 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-04-06 23:36 ` Ricardo Neri
2021-04-06 4:11 ` [PATCH 3/4] sched/fair: Consider SMT in ASYM_PACKING load balance Ricardo Neri
2021-04-06 11:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-04-06 23:17 ` Ricardo Neri
2021-04-08 11:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-04-09 5:12 ` Ricardo Neri [this message]
2021-04-06 11:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-04-06 23:17 ` Ricardo Neri
2021-04-08 11:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-04-09 5:13 ` Ricardo Neri
2021-04-06 4:11 ` [PATCH 4/4] x86/sched: Enable checks of the state of SMT siblings in load balancing Ricardo Neri
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=20210409051229.GA26235@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com \
--to=ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com \
--cc=aubrey.li@intel.com \
--cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.comi \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qperret@google.com \
--cc=ravi.v.shankar@intel.com \
--cc=ricardo.neri@intel.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).