Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] sched: Add NOHZ_STATS_KICK
To:     Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@foss.arm.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Brendan Jackman <brendan.jackman@arm.com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>
References: <20171222075934.f6yenvcb2zkf2ysd@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CAKfTPtC0+5zjvgNXMyVcvnnyJh0giQgJHtx+5p-GEpjUW1x8eg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20171222082915.4lcb7xyyooqyjpia@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20171222091221.ow5vn3ydx3hj4nht@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CAKfTPtAzutuyA7D2qOErKPwdFaRK082YAtVn4ci8hAOUvL3zMQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20171222185629.lysjebfifgdwvvhu@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20171222204247.kyc6ugyyu3ei7zhs@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CAKfTPtD13p-n9otxq23rQZZKUfA1r03bxYBSDtSdm5HbWX7H6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180115082609.GA6320@linaro.org>
 <20180118103807.GD28799@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
 <20180124082536.GA32318@linaro.org>
From:   Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Message-ID: <b4ccaf05-36f7-fdde-dbb4-4ee98d2ebd7a@arm.com>
Date:   Mon, 29 Jan 2018 19:43:44 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180124082536.GA32318@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 01/24/2018 09:25 AM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Le Thursday 18 Jan 2018 à 10:38:07 (+0000), Morten Rasmussen a écrit :
>> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 09:26:09AM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>>> Le Wednesday 03 Jan 2018 à 10:16:00 (+0100), Vincent Guittot a écrit :

[...]

>>>
>>> Hi Peter,
>>>
>>> With the patch below on top of your branch, the blocked loads are updated and
>>> decayed regularly. The main differences are:
>>> - It doesn't use a timer to trig ilb but the tick and when a cpu becomes idle.
>>>    The main drawback of this solution is that the load is blocked when the
>>>    system is fully idle with the advantage of not waking up a fully idle
>>>    system. We have to wait for the next tick or newly idle event for updating
>>>    blocked load when the system leaves idle stat which can be up to a tick long.
>>>    If this is too long, we can check for kicking ilb when task wakes up so the
>>>    blocked load will be updated as soon as the system leaves idle state.
>>>    The main advantage is that we don't wake up a fully idle system every 32ms to
>>>    update blocked load that will be not used.
>>> - I'm working on one more improvement to use nohz_idle_balance in the newly
>>>    idle case when the system is not overloaded and
>>>    (this_rq->avg_idle > sysctl_sched_migration_cost). In this case, we can try to
>>>    use nohz_idle_balance with NOHZ_STATS_KICK and abort as soon as it exceed
>>>    this_rq->avg_idle. This will remove some calls to kick_ilb and some wake up
>>>    of an idle cpus.
>>
>> This sound like what I meant in my other reply :-)
>>
>> It seems pointless to have a timer to update PELT if the system is
>> completely idle, and when it isn't we can piggy back other events to
>> make the updates happen.
> 
> The patch below implements what has been described above. It calls part of
> nohz_idle_balance when a cpu becomes idle and kick a ilb if it takes too much
> time. This removes part of ilb that are kicked on an idle cpu for updating
> the blocked load but the ratio really depends on when the tick happens compared
> to a cpu becoming idle and the 32ms boundary. I have an additionnal patch that
> enables to update the blocked loads when a cpu becomes idle 1 period before
> kicking an ilb and there is far less ilb because we give more chance to the
> newly idle case (time_after is replaced by time_after_eq in idle_balance()).
> 
> The patch also uses a function cfs_rq_has_blocked, which only checks the
> util/load_avg, instead of the cfs_rq_is_decayed which check *_sum too. This
> reduce significantly the number of update of blocked load. the *_avg will be
> fully decayed in around 300~400ms but it's far longer for the *_sum which have
> a higher resolution and we can easily reach almost seconds. But only the *_avg
> are used to make decision so keeping some blocked *_sum is acceptable.
> 
> ---
>   kernel/sched/fair.c | 121 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>   1 file changed, 92 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 898785d..ed90303 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -7356,6 +7356,17 @@ static inline bool cfs_rq_is_decayed(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
>   	return true;
>   }
>   
> +static inline bool cfs_rq_has_blocked(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
> +{
> +	if (cfs_rq->avg.load_avg)
> +		return true;
> +
> +	if (cfs_rq->avg.util_avg)
> +		return true;
> +
> +	return false;
> +}
> +

Can we not change cfs_rq_is_decayed() to use avg.foo_avg instead of 
avg.foo_sum ?

>   #ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
>   
>   static void update_blocked_averages(int cpu)
> @@ -7393,7 +7404,9 @@ static void update_blocked_averages(int cpu)
>   		 */
>   		if (cfs_rq_is_decayed(cfs_rq))
>   			list_del_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
> -		else
> +
> +		/* Don't need periodic decay once load/util_avg are null */
> +		if (cfs_rq_has_blocked(cfs_rq))
>   			done = false;
>   	}
>   
> @@ -7463,7 +7476,7 @@ static inline void update_blocked_averages(int cpu)
>   	update_cfs_rq_load_avg(cfs_rq_clock_task(cfs_rq), cfs_rq);
>   #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON
>   	rq->last_blocked_load_update_tick = jiffies;
> -	if (cfs_rq_is_decayed(cfs_rq))
> +	if (cfs_rq_has_blocked(cfs_rq))

Schouldn't this be !cfs_rq_has_blocked(cfs_rq) ?

>   		rq->has_blocked_load = 0;
>   #endif
>   	rq_unlock_irqrestore(rq, &rf);

[...]

> @@ -9438,7 +9451,17 @@ static bool nohz_idle_balance(struct rq *this_rq, enum cpu_idle_type idle)
>   		 */
>   		if (need_resched()) {
>   			has_blocked_load = true;
> -			break;
> +			goto abort;
> +		}
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * If the update is done while CPU becomes idle, we abort
> +		 * the update when its cost is higher than the average idle
> +		 * time in orde to not delay a possible wake up.
> +		 */
> +		if (idle == CPU_NEWLY_IDLE && this_rq->avg_idle < curr_cost) {
> +			has_blocked_load = true;
> +			goto abort;
>   		}
>   
>   		rq = cpu_rq(balance_cpu);
> @@ -9453,10 +9476,10 @@ static bool nohz_idle_balance(struct rq *this_rq, enum cpu_idle_type idle)
>   		if (time_after_eq(jiffies, rq->next_balance)) {
>   			struct rq_flags rf;
>   
> -			rq_lock_irq(rq, &rf);
> +			rq_lock_irqsave(rq, &rf);
>   			update_rq_clock(rq);
>   			cpu_load_update_idle(rq);
> -			rq_unlock_irq(rq, &rf);
> +			rq_unlock_irqrestore(rq, &rf);
>   
>   			if (flags & NOHZ_BALANCE_KICK)
>   				rebalance_domains(rq, CPU_IDLE);
> @@ -9466,10 +9489,17 @@ static bool nohz_idle_balance(struct rq *this_rq, enum cpu_idle_type idle)
>   			next_balance = rq->next_balance;
>   			update_next_balance = 1;
>   		}

Why do you do this cpu_load_update_idle(rq) even this was called with 
CPU_NEWLY_IDLE? Wouldn't it be sufficient to jump to the curr_cost 
calculation in this case?

> +
> +		domain_cost = sched_clock_cpu(this_cpu) - t0;
> +		curr_cost += domain_cost;
> +
>   	}
>   
> -	update_blocked_averages(this_cpu);
> -	has_blocked_load |= this_rq->has_blocked_load;
> +	/* Newly idle CPU doesn't need an update */
> +	if (idle != CPU_NEWLY_IDLE) {
> +		update_blocked_averages(this_cpu);
> +		has_blocked_load |= this_rq->has_blocked_load;
> +	}
>   
>   	if (flags & NOHZ_BALANCE_KICK)
>   		rebalance_domains(this_rq, CPU_IDLE);

[...]