Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
References: <20201021150335.1103231-1-aubrey.li@linux.intel.com> <jhjimamz1dv.mognet@arm.com> <27f88d6a-302e-2c28-c936-22ac233fe175@linux.intel.com>
User-agent: mu4e 0.9.17; emacs 26.3
From:   Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
To:     "Li\, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
        vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
        rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
        tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@intel.com>,
        Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>,
        Jiang Biao <benbjiang@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3] sched/fair: select idle cpu from idle cpumask for task wakeup
In-reply-to: <27f88d6a-302e-2c28-c936-22ac233fe175@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 06 Nov 2020 21:22:36 +0000
Message-ID: <jhjy2jexjs3.mognet@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk


On 04/11/20 11:52, Li, Aubrey wrote:
> On 2020/11/4 3:27, Valentin Schneider wrote:
>>> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, cpu_idle_state);
>>
>> I would've expected this to be far less compact than a cpumask, but that's
>> not the story readelf is telling me. Objdump tells me this is recouping
>> some of the padding in .data..percpu, at least with the arm64 defconfig.
>>
>> In any case this ought to be better wrt cacheline bouncing, which I suppose
>> is what we ultimately want here.
>
> Yes, every CPU has a byte, so it may not be less than a cpumask. Probably I can
> put it into struct rq, do you have any better suggestions?
>

Not really, I'm afraid.