Received: by 2002:a25:e7d8:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id e207csp1589231ybh; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 04:02:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsaKemuDlSG7htsQuf0j8d2iwhdmpBOyxV+ssCf9V/b2mBtWv5dF0ckWZ/Bn9K57nARasCx X-Received: by 2002:a9d:64ca:: with SMTP id n10mr10514726otl.325.1584097368448; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 04:02:48 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1584097368; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=wQyoFr6CMBQh/Tyqj/VN1XYHMDZb1BvWj22UCDcNxlXVl5iiWzcCrTGCSwPirjAVjM haWm4NB/amQCt5GokFFjde3XSs8YUGd5lvlRuKCXhinJN6/tck2Wib2AntCJ7CsvL2UX yHAOD+6WkLIcR+4+MPHL/5YQANaPswYQSoeRogl414SHmoWYyugki/dIv1nqq4jrUrSk /rMkmer799X4ml99ERw0HS54KBD3QSyCp748oI0Ick5Wea/7W2Unw3lkogUDX0osTu7G dmXnv3Lv8S5BB6EjNRB5pCNWAgc6SkuLFmn28m54GIS8eHuJ7VXD4g1fxOVngh5ZT+Qf b2xw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:mime-version:message-id:date:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:user-agent:references; bh=oqgbDLZZHXTFwyCYr8Wt4mBj0+rom8JKv3I4eo8okbA=; b=0CE2FJOHv6NxYfxSjsusmxkCd2QD3i5Fs8SIvB5wPrQVP2u+sk6PVDbak38W3bK7ev yzJT7zLfdY5tq3T2jJAKnrWb3HuINBTQMp90bVsOUo3y4jx8zDfWG+/wR+Dyz2of3S7u gm7RwNBXrrkcTfB4joMJ0sXLp+LYBV2J/kV1NtHpHD1jZ3COMITVv6xWBoVJlLSSo/i1 si/6aorUPK4C94ySzkl/jJfGVid2LF5F+k1Cvffcz1NzNM2TakR6CjBBDfmp+hro6SVi bkDmiXLvH6/0cQCwlvtCOyFRl4tAxt2A8pGcRGs8pKKCMLlNR2hFHe+HKYdee8G5bZUv X5Sg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; 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 Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id h4si4232962otr.51.2020.03.13.04.02.34; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 04:02:48 -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; 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 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726442AbgCMLAa (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 13 Mar 2020 07:00:30 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:52192 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726364AbgCMLAa (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Mar 2020 07:00:30 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C2CC30E; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 04:00:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e113632-lin (e113632-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.194.46]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 640D33F534; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 04:00:28 -0700 (PDT) References: <20200312165429.990-1-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> User-agent: mu4e 0.9.17; emacs 26.3 From: Valentin Schneider To: Vincent Guittot Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: improve spreading of utilization In-reply-to: <20200312165429.990-1-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 11:00:21 +0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 12 2020, Vincent Guittot wrote: > kernel/sched/fair.c | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c > index 3c8a379c357e..97a0307312d9 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c > @@ -9025,6 +9025,14 @@ static struct rq *find_busiest_queue(struct lb_env *env, > case migrate_util: > util = cpu_util(cpu_of(rq)); > > + /* > + * Don't try to pull utilization from a CPU with one > + * running task. Whatever its utilization, we will fail > + * detach the task. > + */ > + if (nr_running <= 1) > + continue; > + Doesn't this break misfit? If the busiest group is group_misfit_task, it is totally valid for the runqueues to have a single running task - that's the CPU-bound task we want to upmigrate. If the busiest rq has only a single running task, we'll skip the detach_tasks() block and go straight to the active balance bits. Misfit balancing totally relies on this, and IMO ASYM_PACKING does too. Looking at voluntary_active_balance(), it seems your change also goes against the one added by 1aaf90a4b88a ("sched: Move CFS tasks to CPUs with higher capacity") The bandaid here would be gate this 'continue' with checks against the busiest_group_type, but that's only a loose link wrt voluntary_active_balance(). > if (busiest_util < util) { > busiest_util = util; > busiest = rq;