lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Nov]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 03/10] sched/topology: Provide cfs_overload_cpus bitmap
From
Date
Hi Steve,

On 09/11/2018 12:50, Steve Sistare wrote:
> From: Steve Sistare <steve.sistare@oracle.com>
>
> Define and initialize a sparse bitmap of overloaded CPUs, per
> last-level-cache scheduling domain, for use by the CFS scheduling class.
> Save a pointer to cfs_overload_cpus in the rq for efficient access.
>
> Signed-off-by: Steve Sistare <steven.sistare@oracle.com>
> ---
> include/linux/sched/topology.h | 1 +
> kernel/sched/sched.h | 2 ++
> kernel/sched/topology.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++--
> 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/topology.h b/include/linux/sched/topology.h
> index 6b99761..b173a77 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/topology.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/topology.h
> @@ -72,6 +72,7 @@ struct sched_domain_shared {
> atomic_t ref;
> atomic_t nr_busy_cpus;
> int has_idle_cores;
> + struct sparsemask *cfs_overload_cpus;

Thinking about misfit stealing, we can't use the sd_llc_shared's because
on big.LITTLE misfit migrations happen across LLC domains.

I was thinking of adding a misfit sparsemask to the root_domain, but
then I thought we could do the same thing for cfs_overload_cpus.

By doing so we'd have a single source of information for overloaded CPUs,
and we could filter that down during idle balance - you mentioned earlier
wanting to try stealing at each SD level. This would also let you get
rid of [PATCH 02].

The main part of try_steal() could then be written down as something like
this:

----->8-----

for_each_domain(this_cpu, sd) {
span = sched_domain_span(sd)

for_each_sparse_wrap(src_cpu, overload_cpus) {
if (cpumask_test_cpu(src_cpu, span) &&
steal_from(dts_rq, dst_rf, &locked, src_cpu)) {
stolen = 1;
goto out;
}
}
}

------8<-----

We could limit the stealing to stop at the highest SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES
domain for now so there would be no behavioural change - but we'd
factorize the #ifdef SCHED_SMT bit. Furthermore, the door would be open
to further stealing.

What do you think?

[...]

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-11-12 17:43    [W:0.209 / U:2.236 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site