Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:2785:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id ia5csp377948pxb; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 07:16:55 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxoTst31hTuWT/yUpFLl8C8/xBpMl8cEu1bWtwbNsPRNo4m03+5+n8sBjIQbSMkGYSM7P31 X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:3c3:: with SMTP id t3mr5718465edw.86.1610119015284; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 07:16:55 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1610119015; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=qwl6U4SRvWTPd171I0/GIOvq89ULW/uypbl0AcZX4aa3KltJ7yhgqSJA1XHQswP/kC SPOLXrGXUgY+WPUsCPw6WsJaggisKJSAmNOjRSTnw3v/seK6IKhuRxOxXywKyoLah5zr Z3HOddIvvuJnpeHKaZOym4AC/tg9LYAZgPOuaLNEJYK0thAYvJZtGV9eIqbgUS+jY1G9 skBbrmsYQFZLniBbh4vd+K7fdGNZYy2RAwmUPAoAL2c8w9rMviGmh18SzGBv0kz3esCH kcK9dtEa0wuwjJXixQvJjqRoU3xVIRveSVw5ZUKG519G+haVCnMEKA92X33/e9hAivei EEdg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=sOF+2ELGLZ8ABoHR31veJIoiLQh58fmf417OiaiDE00=; b=MB9XB5S7z+Dvf41CJzBndCKCxekSU7OuGjNsKApG0KoZjXDDhHxyg75YezGlI5vtlp mJGnrxak/ew/OwntJgCMfk+1o0y6UGfgXCdPQbftK0bFP6l87lDhL2a/2L97/PvOCR2/ PQozsNNdCuzW4cb2B5FWCOOGBZCVtDIKQFe6nDhyC0xxU4hl06eXzTgKSuKML2I7Cqai lRlKUgy/yMnPf5kNK/0WsaCUdqbwTKxKr/zfAGl3XOCwiMHL5Tn+54XWcRO8TB1hRd6T qet5/ael0F35Uwrx9gGiiNiRJ0lVHmkYGfg+8ZtfKk/MW25oD2qDzgrLae5CCWZwJ/42 +aNg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id o11si3656321ejg.118.2021.01.08.07.16.31; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 07:16:55 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727722AbhAHPNi (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 8 Jan 2021 10:13:38 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:52824 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725806AbhAHPNi (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2021 10:13:38 -0500 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 24E61ED1; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 07:12:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from e123083-lin (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 88CFA3F70D; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 07:12:47 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2021 16:12:41 +0100 From: Morten Rasmussen To: Tim Chen Cc: Barry Song , valentin.schneider@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, lenb@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jonathan.cameron@huawei.com, mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, mark.rutland@arm.com, sudeep.holla@arm.com, aubrey.li@linux.intel.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linuxarm@openeuler.org, xuwei5@huawei.com, prime.zeng@hisilicon.com, tiantao6@hisilicon.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 0/2] scheduler: expose the topology of clusters and add cluster scheduler Message-ID: <20210108151241.GA47324@e123083-lin> References: <20210106083026.40444-1-song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com> <737932c9-846a-0a6b-08b8-e2d2d95b67ce@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <737932c9-846a-0a6b-08b8-e2d2d95b67ce@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 03:16:47PM -0800, Tim Chen wrote: > On 1/6/21 12:30 AM, Barry Song wrote: > > ARM64 server chip Kunpeng 920 has 6 clusters in each NUMA node, and each > > cluster has 4 cpus. All clusters share L3 cache data while each cluster > > has local L3 tag. On the other hand, each cluster will share some > > internal system bus. This means cache is much more affine inside one cluster > > than across clusters. > > There is a similar need for clustering in x86. Some x86 cores could share L2 caches that > is similar to the cluster in Kupeng 920 (e.g. on Jacobsville there are 6 clusters > of 4 Atom cores, each cluster sharing a separate L2, and 24 cores sharing L3). > Having a sched domain at the L2 cluster helps spread load among > L2 domains. This will reduce L2 cache contention and help with > performance for low to moderate load scenarios. IIUC, you are arguing for the exact opposite behaviour, i.e. balancing between L2 caches while Barry is after consolidating tasks within the boundaries of a L3 tag cache. One helps cache utilization, the other communication latency between tasks. Am I missing something? IMHO, we need some numbers on the table to say which way to go. Looking at just benchmarks of one type doesn't show that this is a good idea in general. Morten