Received: by 2002:a25:824b:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d11csp7029443ybn; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:37:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzHv9f0yFTx9LeQL6XIt3E6bgkWsAVYsVmPmugvX5dSEZ9pLPBslRe/eCmXW2Uz4Qm4yfnv X-Received: by 2002:a50:e79b:: with SMTP id b27mr20211192edn.186.1569854234076; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:37:14 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1569854234; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=nfgj+28o9/aq/Pcc3KFCHdg5j9ISn4RLmGSe4bTGwpnaUZEsQnCnNKgx6Id8pGE+K3 kYGG5paKQhhrkGzGEzg4roGRUw/YUbjCH92EPjwmfrRhkr0vh6OFrV2ByPw7TDJCi60k xPnkznejF/xBaDcyR/2cKVIWAhTCHCUH8RaSpjdeOEttIv/HJM5na4weya6qqsddxoYz br2qI5pRqAeeV8MK+cdnkxRe7VRb7FX+1rOJMi3FJLUqtBZvNt52SAlcq0TOJ2AH95e7 dmmzG7vQEen1ikDbcDSIj02gcfKXk45GNWTyzhTkyUEj+CgucXslKzpB8kHImGa74fpj WXag== 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=RRmAIt8Bb7hxPg1Z/NX9GRGwvPP3410MbXYQc+FgXoM=; b=dsgL3wKCP7DIhJ2H4E2ENxERZPnIIfF1bDJ71+Q412TFRUi6yfux56P6mySUAAb2M1 kXjZ67I8ljwm2Btit8JtOZGeKiLO1wjIqb1aMPWATO3zfMisk7nRzLvoXE394tPoZ73q H6zHHw9bs2lp5r1otn69UIc1xq44uS1XPiK0DxT8ITENDr5A7t43AweLi1IoqvvlHXZk 3p28ABUuUOCJjIzL+nrsMAXRNOPArqWF5AhJeOAvy1KwKtP3+vWX8z5+Rj7HCfAlg+Bp uZCFZZF0lP9EJzLjrB2Q+g9I7R2fzQXp6wwLJ6pwh6TdN7zUQ1E8yIjD0NFc9rgVPlWP cLfw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@digitalocean.com header.s=google header.b="TJ/QYoNN"; 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=digitalocean.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 34si7726825edk.26.2019.09.30.07.36.47; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:37:14 -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=@digitalocean.com header.s=google header.b="TJ/QYoNN"; 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=digitalocean.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731504AbfI3OgP (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 30 Sep 2019 10:36:15 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-f68.google.com ([209.85.210.68]:41984 "EHLO mail-ot1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730809AbfI3OgP (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Sep 2019 10:36:15 -0400 Received: by mail-ot1-f68.google.com with SMTP id c10so8488993otd.9 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:36:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=digitalocean.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=RRmAIt8Bb7hxPg1Z/NX9GRGwvPP3410MbXYQc+FgXoM=; b=TJ/QYoNNELeDyFXlkdZI7w+5tyl1AhAET7lb7WvOvrCWjdFE8a0pq1eUfcN97AWOsb /aagxcGmIvRinHIeY335E9ZxUdfg4Ezn8CcSA8D4tMAW8NQy/bOZPee8/kbIVpTi3Bsh 4kwg0W6GL/z411qlIjGYNE5OxmcxnBuCoo77A= 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=RRmAIt8Bb7hxPg1Z/NX9GRGwvPP3410MbXYQc+FgXoM=; b=euT2MYagj6lz0Ed6H9BbmzDqDlWEs9EyS0UCjng+pDg4lyJHByTiDXHRbd1CctS1fK LkRzGqKrZtTvioJ9VP13iF2QA+5b+ITeL4PzhicUYxf6Us3jSzQTiwvjINcY0rv2gUDO vU39gVTlOtUzofH5KoaXU1kdmhIUDVdL6EdXje8ljL0a++vXuYy9ML5cWmSOiQY2Ywdu JFY1ovehU7uKI5ZcYex5mm4b9JqjSgIOu9MSArKTktvuWbpsBx6p1GzggkP9iVAVtDe4 iBA+AXQYMQvLwQVt/8jZ1TfzGmg1nAPOQAL+qSmtAwJbmnQ/kznCJsPRLFTLInnwtPF7 guiw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXP4bHSp6/BLRUd/wO2YX+rJgM6Oaf/tQSpli10l6C3nn/3RpY/ dQH+7rk/BLOwk0bFJdIUmSKkZXxY9GWfhZo9R6Qcbg== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:19cf:: with SMTP id k73mr13760457otk.237.1569854173938; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:36:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190726152101.GA27884@sinkpad> <7dc86e3c-aa3f-905f-3745-01181a3b0dac@linux.intel.com> <20190802153715.GA18075@sinkpad> <69cd9bca-da28-1d35-3913-1efefe0c1c22@linux.intel.com> <20190911140204.GA52872@aaronlu> <7b001860-05b4-4308-df0e-8b60037b8000@linux.intel.com> <20190912120400.GA16200@aaronlu> <20190915141402.GA1349@aaronlu> In-Reply-To: From: Vineeth Remanan Pillai Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 10:36:03 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 00/16] Core scheduling v3 To: Aubrey Li Cc: Tim Chen , Aaron Lu , Julien Desfossez , Dario Faggioli , "Li, Aubrey" , Subhra Mazumdar , Nishanth Aravamudan , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Paul Turner , Linus Torvalds , Linux List Kernel Mailing , =?UTF-8?B?RnLDqWTDqXJpYyBXZWlzYmVja2Vy?= , Kees Cook , Greg Kerr , Phil Auld , Valentin Schneider , Mel Gorman , Pawan Gupta , Paolo Bonzini 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 Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 6:16 PM Aubrey Li wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 4:41 AM Tim Chen wrote: > > > > On 9/17/19 6:33 PM, Aubrey Li wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 10:14 PM Aaron Lu wrote: > > > > >> > > >> And I have pushed Tim's branch to: > > >> https://github.com/aaronlu/linux coresched-v3-v5.1.5-test-tim > > >> > > >> Mine: > > >> https://github.com/aaronlu/linux coresched-v3-v5.1.5-test-core_vruntime > > > > > > Aubrey, > > > > Thanks for testing with your set up. > > > > I think the test that's of interest is to see my load balancing added on top > > of Aaron's fairness patch, instead of using my previous version of > > forced idle approach in coresched-v3-v5.1.5-test-tim branch. > > > > I'm trying to figure out a way to solve fairness only(not include task > placement), > So @Vineeth - if everyone is okay with Aaron's fairness patch, maybe > we should have a v4? > Yes, I think we can move to v4 with Aaron's fairness fix and potentially Tim's load balancing fixes. I am working on some improvements to Aaron's fixes and shall post the changes after some testing. Basically, what I am trying to do is to propagate the min_vruntime change down to all the cf_rq and individual se when we update the cfs_rq(rq->core)->min_vrutime. So, we can make sure that the rq stays in sync and starvation do not happen. If everything goes well, we shall also post the v4 towards the end of this week. We would be testing Tim's load balancing patches in an over-committed VM scenario to observe the effect of the fix. Thanks, Vineeth