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;
To:     Dario Faggioli <dfaggioli@suse.com>,
        Julien Desfossez <jdesfossez@digitalocean.com>,
        "Li, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@linux.alibaba.com>,
        Aubrey Li <aubrey.intel@gmail.com>,
        Subhra Mazumdar <subhra.mazumdar@oracle.com>,
        Vineeth Remanan Pillai <vpillai@digitalocean.com>,
        Nishanth Aravamudan <naravamudan@digitalocean.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        =?UTF-8?B?RnLDqWTDqXJpYyBXZWlzYmVja2Vy?= <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Greg Kerr <kerrnel@google.com>, Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>,
        Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
        Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
References: <20190612163345.GB26997@sinkpad>
 <635c01b0-d8f3-561b-5396-10c75ed03712@oracle.com>
 <20190613032246.GA17752@sinkpad>
 <CAERHkrsMFjjBpPZS7jDhzbob4PSmiPj83OfqEeiKgaDAU3ajOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190619183302.GA6775@sinkpad> <20190718100714.GA469@aaronlu>
 <CAERHkrtvLKxrpvfw04urAuougsYOWnNw4-H1vUDFx27Dvy0=Ww@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190725143003.GA992@aaronlu> <20190726152101.GA27884@sinkpad>
 <7dc86e3c-aa3f-905f-3745-01181a3b0dac@linux.intel.com>
 <20190802153715.GA18075@sinkpad>
 <eec72c2d533b7600c63de3c8001cc6ab9e915afe.camel@suse.com>
From:   Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Autocrypt: addr=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata=
 mQINBE6ONugBEAC1c8laQ2QrezbYFetwrzD0v8rOqanj5X1jkySQr3hm/rqVcDJudcfdSMv0
 BNCCjt2dofFxVfRL0G8eQR4qoSgzDGDzoFva3NjTJ/34TlK9MMouLY7X5x3sXdZtrV4zhKGv
 3Rt2osfARdH3QDoTUHujhQxlcPk7cwjTXe4o3aHIFbcIBUmxhqPaz3AMfdCqbhd7uWe9MAZX
 7M9vk6PboyO4PgZRAs5lWRoD4ZfROtSViX49KEkO7BDClacVsODITpiaWtZVDxkYUX/D9OxG
 AkxmqrCxZxxZHDQos1SnS08aKD0QITm/LWQtwx1y0P4GGMXRlIAQE4rK69BDvzSaLB45ppOw
 AO7kw8aR3eu/sW8p016dx34bUFFTwbILJFvazpvRImdjmZGcTcvRd8QgmhNV5INyGwtfA8sn
 L4V13aZNZA9eWd+iuB8qZfoFiyAeHNWzLX/Moi8hB7LxFuEGnvbxYByRS83jsxjH2Bd49bTi
 XOsAY/YyGj6gl8KkjSbKOkj0IRy28nLisFdGBvgeQrvaLaA06VexptmrLjp1Qtyesw6zIJeP
 oHUImJltjPjFvyfkuIPfVIB87kukpB78bhSRA5mC365LsLRl+nrX7SauEo8b7MX0qbW9pg0f
 wsiyCCK0ioTTm4IWL2wiDB7PeiJSsViBORNKoxA093B42BWFJQARAQABtDRUaW0gQ2hlbiAo
 d29yayByZWxhdGVkKSA8dGltLmMuY2hlbkBsaW51eC5pbnRlbC5jb20+iQI+BBMBAgAoAhsD
 BgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAUCXFIuxAUJEYZe0wAKCRCiZ7WKota4STH3EACW
 1jBRzdzEd5QeTQWrTtB0Dxs5cC8/P7gEYlYQCr3Dod8fG7UcPbY7wlZXc3vr7+A47/bSTVc0
 DhUAUwJT+VBMIpKdYUbvfjmgicL9mOYW73/PHTO38BsMyoeOtuZlyoUl3yoxWmIqD4S1xV04
 q5qKyTakghFa+1ZlGTAIqjIzixY0E6309spVTHoImJTkXNdDQSF0AxjW0YNejt52rkGXXSoi
 IgYLRb3mLJE/k1KziYtXbkgQRYssty3n731prN5XrupcS4AiZIQl6+uG7nN2DGn9ozy2dgTi
 smPAOFH7PKJwj8UU8HUYtX24mQA6LKRNmOgB290PvrIy89FsBot/xKT2kpSlk20Ftmke7KCa
 65br/ExDzfaBKLynztcF8o72DXuJ4nS2IxfT/Zmkekvvx/s9R4kyPyebJ5IA/CH2Ez6kXIP+
 q0QVS25WF21vOtK52buUgt4SeRbqSpTZc8bpBBpWQcmeJqleo19WzITojpt0JvdVNC/1H7mF
 4l7og76MYSTCqIKcLzvKFeJSie50PM3IOPp4U2czSrmZURlTO0o1TRAa7Z5v/j8KxtSJKTgD
 lYKhR0MTIaNw3z5LPWCCYCmYfcwCsIa2vd3aZr3/Ao31ZnBuF4K2LCkZR7RQgLu+y5Tr8P7c
 e82t/AhTZrzQowzP0Vl6NQo8N6C2fcwjSrkCDQROjjboARAAx+LxKhznLH0RFvuBEGTcntrC
 3S0tpYmVsuWbdWr2ZL9VqZmXh6UWb0K7w7OpPNW1FiaWtVLnG1nuMmBJhE5jpYsi+yU8sbMA
 5BEiQn2hUo0k5eww5/oiyNI9H7vql9h628JhYd9T1CcDMghTNOKfCPNGzQ8Js33cFnszqL4I
 N9jh+qdg5FnMHs/+oBNtlvNjD1dQdM6gm8WLhFttXNPn7nRUPuLQxTqbuoPgoTmxUxR3/M5A
 KDjntKEdYZziBYfQJkvfLJdnRZnuHvXhO2EU1/7bAhdz7nULZktw9j1Sp9zRYfKRnQdIvXXa
 jHkOn3N41n0zjoKV1J1KpAH3UcVfOmnTj+u6iVMW5dkxLo07CddJDaayXtCBSmmd90OG0Odx
 cq9VaIu/DOQJ8OZU3JORiuuq40jlFsF1fy7nZSvQFsJlSmHkb+cDMZDc1yk0ko65girmNjMF
 hsAdVYfVsqS1TJrnengBgbPgesYO5eY0Tm3+0pa07EkONsxnzyWJDn4fh/eA6IEUo2JrOrex
 O6cRBNv9dwrUfJbMgzFeKdoyq/Zwe9QmdStkFpoh9036iWsj6Nt58NhXP8WDHOfBg9o86z9O
 VMZMC2Q0r6pGm7L0yHmPiixrxWdW0dGKvTHu/DH/ORUrjBYYeMsCc4jWoUt4Xq49LX98KDGN
 dhkZDGwKnAUAEQEAAYkCJQQYAQIADwIbDAUCXFIulQUJEYZenwAKCRCiZ7WKota4SYqUEACj
 P/GMnWbaG6s4TPM5Dg6lkiSjFLWWJi74m34I19vaX2CAJDxPXoTU6ya8KwNgXU4yhVq7TMId
 keQGTIw/fnCv3RLNRcTAapLarxwDPRzzq2snkZKIeNh+WcwilFjTpTRASRMRy9ehKYMq6Zh7
 PXXULzxblhF60dsvi7CuRsyiYprJg0h2iZVJbCIjhumCrsLnZ531SbZpnWz6OJM9Y16+HILp
 iZ77miSE87+xNa5Ye1W1ASRNnTd9ftWoTgLezi0/MeZVQ4Qz2Shk0MIOu56UxBb0asIaOgRj
 B5RGfDpbHfjy3Ja5WBDWgUQGgLd2b5B6MVruiFjpYK5WwDGPsj0nAOoENByJ+Oa6vvP2Olkl
 gQzSV2zm9vjgWeWx9H+X0eq40U+ounxTLJYNoJLK3jSkguwdXOfL2/Bvj2IyU35EOC5sgO6h
 VRt3kA/JPvZK+6MDxXmm6R8OyohR8uM/9NCb9aDw/DnLEWcFPHfzzFFn0idp7zD5SNgAXHzV
 PFY6UGIm86OuPZuSG31R0AU5zvcmWCeIvhxl5ZNfmZtv5h8TgmfGAgF4PSD0x/Bq4qobcfaL
 ugWG5FwiybPzu2H9ZLGoaRwRmCnzblJG0pRzNaC/F+0hNf63F1iSXzIlncHZ3By15bnt5QDk
 l50q2K/r651xphs7CGEdKi1nU0YJVbQxJQ==
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 00/16] Core scheduling v3
Message-ID: <69cd9bca-da28-1d35-3913-1efefe0c1c22@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 7 Aug 2019 10:10:47 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <eec72c2d533b7600c63de3c8001cc6ab9e915afe.camel@suse.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 8/7/19 1:58 AM, Dario Faggioli wrote:

> So, here comes my question: I've done a benchmarking campaign (yes,
> I'll post numbers soon) using this branch:
> 
> https://github.com/digitalocean/linux-coresched.git  vpillai/coresched-v3-v5.1.5-test
> https://github.com/digitalocean/linux-coresched/tree/vpillai/coresched-v3-v5.1.5-test
> 
> Last commit:
> 7feb1007f274 "Fix stalling of untagged processes competing with tagged
> processes"
> 
> Since I see that, in this thread, there are various patches being
> proposed and discussed... should I rerun my benchmarks with them
> applied? If yes, which ones? And is there, by any chance, one (or maybe
> more than one) updated git branch(es)?
> 
> Thanks in advance and Regards
> 

Hi Dario,

Having an extra set of eyes are certainly welcomed.
I'll give my 2 cents on the issues with v3.
Others feel free to chime in if my understanding is
incorrect or I'm missing something.

1) Unfairness between the sibling threads
-----------------------------------------
One sibling thread could be suppressing and force idling
the sibling thread over proportionally.  Resulting in
the force idled CPU not getting run and stall tasks on
suppressed CPU.

Status:
i) Aaron has proposed a patchset here based on using one
rq as a base reference for vruntime for task priority
comparison between siblings.

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190725143248.GC992@aaronlu/
It works well on fairness but has some initialization issues

ii) Tim has proposed a patchset here to account for forced
idle time in rq's min_vruntime
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/f96350c1-25a9-0564-ff46-6658e96d726c@linux.intel.com/
It improves over v3 with simpler logic compared to
Aaron's patch, but does not work as well on fairness

iii) Tim has proposed yet another patch to maintain fairness
of forced idle time between CPU threads per Peter's suggestion.
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/21933a50-f796-3d28-664c-030cb7c98431@linux.intel.com/
Its performance has yet to be tested.

2) Not rescheduling forced idled CPU
------------------------------------
The forced idled CPU does not get a chance to re-schedule
itself, and will stall for a long time even though it
has eligible tasks to run.

Status:
i) Aaron proposed a patch to fix this to check if there
are runnable tasks when scheduling tick comes in.
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190725143344.GD992@aaronlu/

ii) Vineeth has patches to this issue and also issue 1, based
on scheduling in a new "forced idle task" when getting forced
idle, but has yet to post the patches.

3) Load balancing between CPU cores
-----------------------------------
Say if one CPU core's sibling threads get forced idled
a lot as it has mostly incompatible tasks between the siblings,
moving the incompatible load to other cores and pulling
compatible load to the core could help CPU utilization.

So just considering the load of a task is not enough during
load balancing, task compatibility also needs to be considered.
Peter has put in mechanisms to balance compatible tasks between
CPU thread siblings, but not across cores.

Status:
I have not seen patches on this issue.  This issue could lead to
large variance in workload performance based on your luck
in placing the workload among the cores.

Thanks.

Tim