Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:8c0a:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id go10csp362975pxb; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 07:19:03 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx/3JXg8axG26afSCGnfm5YPJJBsRtqjIRqXh3revoj1oUqBnnH2fFHeOFUEB5YDxEU+P3p X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:1b06:: with SMTP id mp6mr3621396ejc.408.1612365541433; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 07:19:01 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1612365541; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=BaCuMq9o/Ix94PMcE++BjzofRDQcoT3NKZGw+U5WzSta3IJZU84kZNbElaMay1GLWB j1b5Uo3Q6YXJBkdc/eFJGkJ8YcGcwQswASQ1m+LUVFzpOAVlIcS5VS1WlbPEu0Wx5sNU bsg+4g8HsNoV+/mfEIFLOBm3kFaDE4tPE/rM4MvZt9JrQtWo7dS/8nzyJisdpi1UzaS1 LP5XoChtLYZISFKj2p35mIXTG7iOW0W1mJSm/Guv1w7ar3HMLA9vL7ygI+kOSE78igDH 4jDvs7owO6W6QQ4mRZYb2mbnOzGzAi3V46GXSu1r35WvDyIx3/5AQjjv+MX93l1AaX1O mzcw== 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=dEHfVxMyKMYidS4odIbSpqV9MTrELTS1IabQqkKU7dg=; b=p0gm9T+Uw5+KigzDhinxjHlnSFdYJfbpYwjBO1dlr62tmVjedLYK8+r5JajK5LmMzz xuEnRMbKsmtB36qtfTKLNHdVKZfkMOk1h5lT8f1XxITwNyGNoqxJBbRpeDB/LSrNaDsN UuCIbIbKbA9bKKZl+T28zzVHTv1EWunb5ASMo/eTnDMxAK9qNT/YGRrVY99dDfwWgdj8 nody5cUVOUqyAPT1TStoe4ro7kNTy/6fmZY0ZaP5b/4Ab5MnC5GZyessqWnHhFRgCtiA FtDQ61WNihkV0hKsg8pC7UT8o7ihkk3gnCwtBonqjOrqClSKWzOSZxxeG1wEFzgAimAv MU5w== 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 f22si1325270edw.413.2021.02.03.07.18.26; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 07:19:01 -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 S233715AbhBCPRV (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 3 Feb 2021 10:17:21 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:41792 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233818AbhBCPOu (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Feb 2021 10:14:50 -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 47FBE11FB; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 07:14:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from e107158-lin (e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.194.78]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E9D323F73B; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 07:14:02 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 15:14:00 +0000 From: Qais Yousef To: Valentin Schneider Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Vincent Guittot , Dietmar Eggemann , Morten Rasmussen , Quentin Perret , Pavan Kondeti , Rik van Riel Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] sched/fair: misfit task load-balance tweaks Message-ID: <20210203151400.ommltjjyuok4yj5e@e107158-lin> References: <20210128183141.28097-1-valentin.schneider@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210128183141.28097-1-valentin.schneider@arm.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/28/21 18:31, Valentin Schneider wrote: > Hi folks, > > Here is this year's series of misfit changes. On the menu: > > o Patch 1 is an independent active balance cleanup > o Patch 2 adds some more sched_asym_cpucapacity static branches > o Patch 3 introduces yet another margin for capacity to capacity > comparisons > o Patches 4-6 build on top of patch 3 and change capacity comparisons > throughout misfit load balancing > o Patches 7-8 fix some extra misfit issues I've been seeing on "real" > workloads. > > IMO the somewhat controversial bit is patch 3, because it attempts to solve > margin issues by... Adding another margin. This does solve issues on > existing platforms (e.g. Pixel4), but we'll be back to square one the day > some "clever" folks spin a platform with two different CPU capacities less than > 5% apart. One more margin is a cause of apprehension to me. But in this case I think it is the appropriate thing to do now. I can't think of a scenario where this could hurt. Thanks -- Qais Yousef