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 0/3] Introduce per-task latency_tolerance for scheduler
 hints
To:     Parth Shah <parth@linux.ibm.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
        patrick.bellasi@matbug.net, valentin.schneider@arm.com,
        qais.yousef@arm.com, pavel@ucw.cz, dhaval.giani@oracle.com,
        qperret@qperret.net, David.Laight@ACULAB.COM,
        morten.rasmussen@arm.com, pjt@google.com, tj@kernel.org,
        viresh.kumar@linaro.org, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com,
        daniel.lezcano@linaro.org
References: <20191125094618.30298-1-parth@linux.ibm.com>
From:   Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Message-ID: <450fc7e2-49d5-d809-281f-7d9a99d3e530@arm.com>
Date:   Thu, 5 Dec 2019 10:24:33 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20191125094618.30298-1-parth@linux.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 25/11/2019 10:46, Parth Shah wrote:
> This patch series is based on the discussion started as the "Usecases for
> the per-task latency-nice attribute"[1]
> 
> This patch series introduces a new per-task attribute latency_tolerance to
> provide the scheduler hints about the latency requirements of the task.

I forgot but is there a chance to have this as a per-taskgroup attribute
as well?

> Latency_tolerance is a ranged attribute of a task with the value ranging
> from [-20, 19] both inclusive which makes it align with the task nice
> value.
> 
> The value should provide scheduler hints about the relative latency
> requirements of tasks, meaning the task with "latency_tolerance = -20"
> should have lower latency than compared to those tasks with higher values.
> Similarly a task with "latency_tolerance = 19" can have higher latency and
> hence such tasks may bot care much about the latency numbers.
> 
> The default value is set to 0. The usecases defined in [1] can use this
> range of [-20, 19] for latency_tolerance for the specific purpose. This
> patch does not define any use cases for such attribute so that any change
> in naming or range does not affect much to the other (future) patches using
> this. The actual use of latency_tolerance during task wakeup and
> load-balancing is yet to be coded for each of those usecases.

This can definitely be useful for Android/EAS by replacing the current
proprietary solution in android-google-common android-5.4:

commit 760b82c9b88d ("ANDROID: sched/fair: Bias EAS placement for latency")
commit c28f9d3945f1 ("ANDROID: sched/core: Add a latency-sensitive flag
to uclamp")

which links to usercase 6 (EAS) in [1].