Received: by 2002:ac0:950c:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id f12csp3935897imc; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 08:31:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyEyRKyWnyO/y8GEi9efrqnp+9UJNUkjHeEWrRmvhWAeXW6+/GzaPyll4V4M+d+M1Ploy7+ X-Received: by 2002:aa7:85cc:: with SMTP id z12mr50085695pfn.196.1552577483129; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 08:31:23 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1552577483; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=VkyX+8DqJpfaNG5Pmkr8BaRvbhZXEbZu5o9YQpbetIsMyMfradbRGHe/piYoy9RrW1 GjvilFYETIUkaLZ+wiONziPHPWuF7ndg2kzwCCPwJraRsYdGCy5m9FmLU0Z/Tqk4MaAm VSfC/1K68Pmf/xiD8uC693MigtFsXSj8u6d5NJC8LRhLu66kAVQ5b72wwMxOo/HTAVyE cYgzBDi/0bSNjCeUJO07NCX92k84SzYnDAihfjOxSbAh6jqOLuag6fWlWfDMtbwaHU9U PAObNRCO9VksH25MjhifM56LeQRSTy6b45iIqM7BWXeZ4LvpUPvqnAOumJXs/1fcZi9P yd+w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=C1gzwrXH/29MVXlo3dBM3RLcsMx5XahkKtGIjc4wjdo=; b=Vspmg/QcBBj5E6jhKI6AaSX3NHEiPl+abg5lIyFkASyiu7OktJRjIvGSJAkjDVfbbO 36SIouu0YoS1ydS+fSDDiSWsX8BgecmutYOwzSZBuNRM708hXXU2vlYwC54+KdgfFwFb pWMbvk1TzBvXaeHK5ckSKMAqSKgYfJJjTVfxYdRv9bmzdgEKPnj1zy0sxW+LYM7VfVBl S9s9MXhx0ZhqmWt+AsyT7w4hs6sl96iaJ6bZS35rr1s3Otof2rw7EREPs/yH6KzdlFXm /FtYaqVUPwLzNAIyEZkUNU0rMFfjwA2J0000YH4XqbGu+lnVE8tHAG03VszKekt4ZrE/ oLzQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b="TmsWX/eN"; 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; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id j16si13139277pfe.152.2019.03.14.08.31.08; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 08:31:23 -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; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b="TmsWX/eN"; 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; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727042AbfCNPaC (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 14 Mar 2019 11:30:02 -0400 Received: from mail-it1-f195.google.com ([209.85.166.195]:51197 "EHLO mail-it1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726938AbfCNPaC (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Mar 2019 11:30:02 -0400 Received: by mail-it1-f195.google.com with SMTP id m137so5359197ita.0 for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 08:30:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=C1gzwrXH/29MVXlo3dBM3RLcsMx5XahkKtGIjc4wjdo=; b=TmsWX/eNiz4+87UGE+AtdUSGAi153qnYUmQdV2BfjZBeW8VFz742UqlQXfVibchRgr DlaDGgvG/dPmF6aUqTJ4T81AiqdF4fKF3S78Jg3tlkfjP4uP42IvL7XyKnWKLc830rlw P7Zein1MRtojChESRkFw67vqrbc8gejBzpMl3InLF/BqM91oyv3Uw72oeEohAatwvE6i mq1bnni+ovEdC+uqF32iPHNPVbvQLVptp056MwlyRy4fZX3jnWHgHztTUb3cEEh3xTe3 RA+CWaD3F15szskVNqdpIqVfwtOnkbfJUNXzHY0XVDMBefNQyZKWnWlIov/8uPpDHnD5 NdNQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=C1gzwrXH/29MVXlo3dBM3RLcsMx5XahkKtGIjc4wjdo=; b=iKwX8tAiWgi2hYh3uv2XR+wfdNKCmK39NUr15x8tbAZSdpglzBHutHpkaEI1ZYAzdY TIviAaitZks+pnQLmby0Qn/zSUKQnZUhItb8Ya7hJ6DIMbjNKVjgJZmPWl39Vq3s3/Eg 5KOVTomVw1hews5ZYZnotl++uwwYhu0GM76ImxGbsptEYgEOaz+ltueC6auBEa2qxJf7 sU+4ty58ZeOWQT2A+vwAaA8uui1os5OcwpyTiUOCBukdVUeHz/07spoTWGWXYRZgZZPj anOkREHTtQ+zIq45DWk5+uZxIfnjPSIImB04Ja87I/yxlauI+K+EVLmhLv9nbwPMC5kT ge5w== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVuRK2ZXFyi0CE2T6sqGlmrEvVgiS7jKqdAKm7dUjNyK4mZGM75 /FiRS27hHccu75lE/swhtE68Fx7/IAv6CM858HCVxw== X-Received: by 2002:a24:a81:: with SMTP id 123mr2411999itw.43.1552577400467; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 08:30:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190208100554.32196-1-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> <20190208100554.32196-2-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> <20190314144600.2ulpeipad7jbxyiy@e110439-lin> In-Reply-To: <20190314144600.2ulpeipad7jbxyiy@e110439-lin> From: Suren Baghdasaryan Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2019 08:29:48 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 01/15] sched/core: uclamp: Add CPU's clamp buckets refcounting To: Patrick Bellasi Cc: LKML , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Tejun Heo , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Vincent Guittot , Viresh Kumar , Paul Turner , Quentin Perret , Dietmar Eggemann , Morten Rasmussen , Juri Lelli , Todd Kjos , Joel Fernandes , Steve Muckle Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 7:46 AM Patrick Bellasi wrote: > > On 13-Mar 14:32, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 2:06 AM Patrick Bellasi wrote: > > > > > > Utilization clamping allows to clamp the CPU's utilization within a > > > [util_min, util_max] range, depending on the set of RUNNABLE tasks on > > > that CPU. Each task references two "clamp buckets" defining its minimum > > > and maximum (util_{min,max}) utilization "clamp values". A CPU's clamp > > > bucket is active if there is at least one RUNNABLE tasks enqueued on > > > that CPU and refcounting that bucket. > > > > > > When a task is {en,de}queued {on,from} a rq, the set of active clamp > > > buckets on that CPU can change. Since each clamp bucket enforces a > > > different utilization clamp value, when the set of active clamp buckets > > > changes, a new "aggregated" clamp value is computed for that CPU. > > > > > > Clamp values are always MAX aggregated for both util_min and util_max. > > > This ensures that no tasks can affect the performance of other > > > co-scheduled tasks which are more boosted (i.e. with higher util_min > > > clamp) or less capped (i.e. with higher util_max clamp). > > > > > > Each task has a: > > > task_struct::uclamp[clamp_id]::bucket_id > > > to track the "bucket index" of the CPU's clamp bucket it refcounts while > > > enqueued, for each clamp index (clamp_id). > > > > > > Each CPU's rq has a: > > > rq::uclamp[clamp_id]::bucket[bucket_id].tasks > > > to track how many tasks, currently RUNNABLE on that CPU, refcount each > > > clamp bucket (bucket_id) of a clamp index (clamp_id). > > > > > > Each CPU's rq has also a: > > > rq::uclamp[clamp_id]::bucket[bucket_id].value > > > to track the clamp value of each clamp bucket (bucket_id) of a clamp > > > index (clamp_id). > > > > > > The rq::uclamp::bucket[clamp_id][] array is scanned every time we need > > > to find a new MAX aggregated clamp value for a clamp_id. This operation > > > is required only when we dequeue the last task of a clamp bucket > > > tracking the current MAX aggregated clamp value. In these cases, the CPU > > > is either entering IDLE or going to schedule a less boosted or more > > > clamped task. > > > The expected number of different clamp values, configured at build time, > > > is small enough to fit the full unordered array into a single cache > > > line. > > > > I assume you are talking about "struct uclamp_rq uclamp[UCLAMP_CNT]" > > here. > > No, I'm talking about the rq::uclamp::bucket[clamp_id][], which is an > array of: > > struct uclamp_bucket { > unsigned long value : bits_per(SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE); > unsigned long tasks : BITS_PER_LONG - bits_per(SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE); > }; > > defined as part of: > > struct uclamp_rq { > unsigned int value; > struct uclamp_bucket bucket[UCLAMP_BUCKETS]; > }; > > > So, it's an array of UCLAMP_BUCKETS (value, tasks) pairs. > > > uclamp_rq size depends on UCLAMP_BUCKETS configurable to be up > > to 20. sizeof(long)*20 is already more than 64 bytes. What am I > > missing? > > Right, the comment above refers to the default configuration, which is > 5 buckets. With that configuration we have: > > > $> pahole kernel/sched/core.o > > ---8<--- > struct uclamp_bucket { > long unsigned int value:11; /* 0:53 8 */ > long unsigned int tasks:53; /* 0: 0 8 */ > > /* size: 8, cachelines: 1, members: 2 */ > /* last cacheline: 8 bytes */ > }; > > struct uclamp_rq { > unsigned int value; /* 0 4 */ > > /* XXX 4 bytes hole, try to pack */ > > struct uclamp_bucket bucket[5]; /* 8 40 */ > > /* size: 48, cachelines: 1, members: 2 */ > /* sum members: 44, holes: 1, sum holes: 4 */ > /* last cacheline: 48 bytes */ > }; > > struct rq { > // ... > /* --- cacheline 2 boundary (128 bytes) --- */ > struct uclamp_rq uclamp[2]; /* 128 96 */ > /* --- cacheline 3 boundary (192 bytes) was 32 bytes ago --- */ > // ... > }; > ---8<--- > > Where you see the array fits into a single cache line. > > Actually I notice now that, since when we removed the bucket dedicated > to the default values, we now have some spare space and we can > probably increase the default (and minimum) value of UCLAMP_BUCKETS to > be 7. > > This will uses two full cache lines in struct rq, one for each clamp > index... Although 7 it's a bit of a odd number and gives by default > buckets of ~14% size instead of the ~20%. > > Thoughts ? Got it. From reading the documentation at the beginning my impression was that whatever value I choose within allowed 5-20 range it would still fit in a cache line. To disambiguate it might be worse mentioning that this is true for the default value or for values up to 7. Thanks! > [...] > > -- > #include > > Patrick Bellasi