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;
Date:   Tue, 25 Feb 2020 19:21:53 +0800
From:   Aaron Lu <aaron.lwe@gmail.com>
To:     Aubrey Li <aubrey.intel@gmail.com>
Cc:     Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
        Julien Desfossez <jdesfossez@digitalocean.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>,
        Dario Faggioli <dfaggioli@suse.com>,
        =?iso-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric?= Weisbecker <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>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 00/19] Core scheduling v4
Message-ID: <20200225112153.GA618752@ziqianlu-desktop.localdomain>
References: <3c3c56c1-b8dc-652c-535e-74f6dcf45560@linux.intel.com>
 <CANaguZAz+mw1Oi8ecZt+JuCWbf=g5UvKrdSvAeM82Z1c+9oWAw@mail.gmail.com>
 <e322a252-f983-e3f3-f823-16d0c16b2867@linux.intel.com>
 <20200212230705.GA25315@sinkpad>
 <29d43466-1e18-6b42-d4d0-20ccde20ff07@linux.intel.com>
 <CAERHkruG4y8si9FrBp7cZNEdfP7EzxbmYwvdF2EvHLf=mU1mgg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200225034438.GA617271@ziqianlu-desktop.localdomain>
 <CAERHkrs_WX=gS0sQ2Wg_SZuAcf_qhKfT05co0uYgaQk8cFj0ag@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200225073446.GA618392@ziqianlu-desktop.localdomain>
 <CAERHkrtraNqWj+RZnUFBaR8Cxk_cprQnzyKEgZ=6K+1mb1Jifw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAERHkrtraNqWj+RZnUFBaR8Cxk_cprQnzyKEgZ=6K+1mb1Jifw@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 06:40:02PM +0800, Aubrey Li wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 3:34 PM Aaron Lu <aaron.lwe@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 01:32:35PM +0800, Aubrey Li wrote:
> > > Aaron - did you test this before? In other words, if you reset repo to your
> > > last commit:
> >
> > I did this test only recently when I started to think if I can use
> > coresched to boost main workload's performance in a colocated
> > environment.
> >
> > >
> > > - 5bd3c80 sched/fair : Wake up forced idle siblings if needed
> > >
> > > Does the problem remain? Just want to check if this is a regression
> > >  introduced by the subsequent patchset.
> >
> > The problem isn't there with commit 5bd3c80 as the head, so yes, it
> > looks like indeed a regression introduced by subsequent patchset.
> >
> > P.S. I will need to take a closer look if each cgA's task is running
> > on a different core later but the cpu usage of cgA is back to 800% with
> > commit 5bd3c80.
> 
> Hmm..., I went through the subsequent patches, and I think this one
> 
> - 4041eeb8f3 sched/fair: don't migrate task if cookie not match
> 
> is probably the major cause, can you please revert this one to see
> if the problem is gone?

Yes, reverting this one fixed the problem.