Received: by 2002:ac0:a5b6:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m51-v6csp3498228imm; Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:59:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKLJSekLZGuGvDHDHnC5g/CPsWE61LSPeyOgzYoai0hXEVvarTkkjKJAQFmNmZP5OlM2LoLH X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:1004:: with SMTP id b4-v6mr12642683pla.82.1529297944890; Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:59:04 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1529297944; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=ydlX7pwqtncRqvdMR+vvbVPQ6lIBhDEW+zjyK7Ot2bD3ly62AlF9116u9WPjc9XZuc 5V66NujMKCTiIVK/T7JBB+sarE2PTk6ERw+/QcLNziJ//nCqlYbsJiEWfx9kh432RoKd nl780kEbMePkaIbLQtFm9k1Jbxi+ljWOwzig8M3ZTI8M38YOTmmVzPLdJGrT8YYE1isS d0ye6GweegDmUNKg77sa5jfnaJ4aMbvIydAmB/1XtHbL8ePKrpY7tnQ6oIlhKucS0/Y/ VT5gdho/RsUbd4tJ5AwyChvRZb6xc1NH2YxSbmaY0oPdcVCkv8cBAUaTf7YJjjfQe6GB lAGA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:references:in-reply-to:message-id:date :subject:cc:to:from:arc-authentication-results; bh=8yiY2kO4sFGW+qz7LMaeTqUMnctxaVjCboNpN9w8HoQ=; b=spgl/prm4HKTkJIgTWC8JB7fDQ4DeMwRlb1YtsHmvwTt9p80Yk5zE7FDlQuyNL8Go3 CG6tCEg2hzwBahNYE9Tir8Wdp8Kpa2tWMr7BB7w29w+YADwRjpqSOjLLapkUUjOcwhW/ rLCaFs/R6PUJ+Oqn3ptTsP9J5wSpbPoc44NC3u0JMdh3rYnM3ZMvutYnBoQ0JlQobs3Z AAbYNkssPRezJSd09bczfujEpqWnIKHnZMCdt1OQicKWcUumDA3gbK+1TJSvGVGcIsW7 w5ut7Neukid7YKhkSiRP1oiX3n6jXzvDwRS+WnF3iFnKaGZL8U5RnvqTxparzhg0/YEA 5F2g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id b17-v6si11414616pgw.440.2018.06.17.21.58.51; Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:59:04 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754815AbeFRE6R (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 18 Jun 2018 00:58:17 -0400 Received: from lgeamrelo11.lge.com ([156.147.23.51]:48799 "EHLO lgeamrelo11.lge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754363AbeFRE6O (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2018 00:58:14 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO lgeamrelo01.lge.com) (156.147.1.125) by 156.147.23.51 with ESMTP; 18 Jun 2018 13:58:13 +0900 X-Original-SENDERIP: 156.147.1.125 X-Original-MAILFROM: byungchul.park@lge.com Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.localdomain) (10.177.222.33) by 156.147.1.125 with ESMTP; 18 Jun 2018 13:58:12 +0900 X-Original-SENDERIP: 10.177.222.33 X-Original-MAILFROM: byungchul.park@lge.com From: Byungchul Park To: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, raistlin@linux.it, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, juri.lelli@gmail.com, bristot@redhat.com, kernel-team@lge.com, joel@joelfernandes.org Subject: [RESEND PATCH v12 1/2] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq() Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:58:08 +0900 Message-Id: <1529297889-24551-2-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.9.1 In-Reply-To: <1529297889-24551-1-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com> References: <1529297889-24551-1-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello Juri, I've changed the code a little bit to avoid a compile warning caused by 'const' args of find_cpu(). Can I keep your Acked-by? BEFORE: static int find_cpu(const struct cpumask *mask, const struct sched_domain *sd, const struct sched_domain *prefer) AFTER: static int find_cpu(const struct cpumask *mask, struct sched_domain *sd, struct sched_domain *prefer) (I temporarily removed the Acked-by you gave me.) Acked-by: Juri Lelli -----8<----- From 5a4753e8c15369420a16fa04026f74ae5c9d377c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Byungchul Park Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 16:46:56 +0900 Subject: [RESEND PATCH v12 1/2] sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq() It would be better to try to check other siblings first if SD_PREFER_SIBLING is flaged when pushing tasks - migration. Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park --- kernel/sched/deadline.c | 80 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 73 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c index 1356afd..6130d40 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c @@ -1853,12 +1853,33 @@ static struct task_struct *pick_earliest_pushable_dl_task(struct rq *rq, int cpu static DEFINE_PER_CPU(cpumask_var_t, local_cpu_mask_dl); +/* + * Find the first CPU in: mask & sd & ~prefer + */ +static int find_cpu(const struct cpumask *mask, + struct sched_domain *sd, + struct sched_domain *prefer) +{ + int cpu; + + for_each_cpu(cpu, mask) { + if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, sched_domain_span(sd))) + continue; + if (prefer && cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, sched_domain_span(prefer))) + continue; + break; + } + + return cpu; +} + static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task) { - struct sched_domain *sd; + struct sched_domain *sd, *prefer = NULL; struct cpumask *later_mask = this_cpu_cpumask_var_ptr(local_cpu_mask_dl); int this_cpu = smp_processor_id(); int cpu = task_cpu(task); + int fallback_cpu = -1; /* Make sure the mask is initialized first */ if (unlikely(!later_mask)) @@ -1910,15 +1931,37 @@ static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task) return this_cpu; } - best_cpu = cpumask_first_and(later_mask, - sched_domain_span(sd)); /* - * Last chance: if a CPU being in both later_mask - * and current sd span is valid, that becomes our - * choice. Of course, the latest possible CPU is - * already under consideration through later_mask. + * If a CPU exists that is in the later_mask and + * the current sd span, but not in the prefer sd + * span, then that becomes our choice. + * + * Of course, the latest possible CPU is already + * under consideration through later_mask. */ + best_cpu = find_cpu(later_mask, sd, prefer); + if (best_cpu < nr_cpu_ids) { + /* + * If current domain is SD_PREFER_SIBLING + * flaged, we have to try to check other + * siblings first. + */ + if (sd->flags & SD_PREFER_SIBLING) { + prefer = sd; + + /* + * fallback_cpu should be one + * in the closest domain among + * SD_PREFER_SIBLING domains, + * in case that more than one + * SD_PREFER_SIBLING domains + * exist in the hierachy. + */ + if (fallback_cpu == -1) + fallback_cpu = best_cpu; + continue; + } rcu_read_unlock(); return best_cpu; } @@ -1927,6 +1970,29 @@ static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task) rcu_read_unlock(); /* + * If fallback_cpu is valid, all our guesses failed *except* for + * SD_PREFER_SIBLING domain. Now, we can return the fallback CPU. + * + * XXX: Consider the following example, 4 cores SMT2 system: + * + * LLC [0 - 7] + * SMT [0 1][2 3][4 5][6 7] + * o x o x x x x x + * + * where 'o': occupied and 'x': empty. + * + * A wakeup on CPU0 will exclude CPU1 and choose CPU3, since + * CPU1 is in a SD_PREFER_SIBLING sd and CPU3 is not. However, + * in this case, CPU4 would have been a better choice, since + * CPU3 is a (SMT) thread of an already loaded core. + * + * Doing it 'right' is difficult and expensive. The current + * solution is an acceptable approximation. + */ + if (fallback_cpu != -1) + return fallback_cpu; + + /* * At this point, all our guesses failed, we just return * 'something', and let the caller sort the things out. */ -- 1.9.1