Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DE8FC636CD for ; Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:15:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233255AbjA2QPD (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jan 2023 11:15:03 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35618 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230076AbjA2QO7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jan 2023 11:14:59 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x32c.google.com (mail-wm1-x32c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 443E71E2B6 for ; Sun, 29 Jan 2023 08:14:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x32c.google.com with SMTP id k16so6524954wms.2 for ; Sun, 29 Jan 2023 08:14:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=layalina-io.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=/kxYlHG5oFypkr3pUxTSgVEs+bHMQxU7f8JXM84b6kU=; b=xWPLpgWGnvTZ6YPIRhflVxRly7YPZXXxsbkCDMr1V9tgl3OcDFvX1jB8BCsQvhfWAE AKWiXP2zsYbejjJQZSCvgb76nD6oXvrJdJUNFD1+zhtpUEx6jncBjHvxh94Vvh/1IA7y tOLpgLsOGJPNcEus+SGg9Q7unk+lS1UGdD07UX3+KaQWUa8rZUUHc72tF0OGK29SUu0d qOgfc/TkSl0VJcRH2qdxfdQqZ+hNNaFVz4lVXlgpi6/yvBNf+6dnxnRHGmB5XP5KUQKm hG56PLnLpDBtTY102dJAN8jg5h+dER0yigjHVjxr2nrBey9AlwVGpTlTDBuo2ogYp1/0 1Y3w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=/kxYlHG5oFypkr3pUxTSgVEs+bHMQxU7f8JXM84b6kU=; b=HUTaJZwPxAWTfjvWfHEwqPG8SZxygP8l9kuR4K0N/g1Tz5UgAHq3bhqQqPFhrjgnST Tq2RslgZY7/7tWSFE8AmF0ufJt5Gwv1ML4iJMINbf70tczqZYx0yDFyfquPIYdccGKZO gdmt2GBX1uMX4Ez4dsMO1cBkNxahhGFrzu7S67mdlNDm/to7NAKJxeb7SPbf6Fbg/Y+w T1oTvPLdEivDV2iLpBhF+atB0thlOQn84xNliHFv+4CoZuCyrkJyFr1mTRhO3LFYTlMh OOLx8nyO3AIEJxkDwXTMZoVzdHddHXlI2D2LlPPmKDhdfPAiw8erd1aN4T8ffzh6SZix lD9g== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2krv74zcNXMWhw+4jUQp6mkakzHRTS3rUdhSU5QOxBF+PzhrunpS 3ZCi/HZjdpbGeOPjCWvrvLWyz9Z/A1WP3ZSe X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXu6gjqIK7PgH1RoeqMCjhcCfC4GKacovTsXQpu5Zak3yTsS9PVrxSkOwNGhA2trKhYX110wHA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3d16:b0:3cf:8b22:76b3 with SMTP id bh22-20020a05600c3d1600b003cf8b2276b3mr44438418wmb.0.1675008896912; Sun, 29 Jan 2023 08:14:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (host86-163-35-10.range86-163.btcentralplus.com. [86.163.35.10]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e5-20020a05600c254500b003dc47fb33dasm5324783wma.18.2023.01.29.08.14.56 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 29 Jan 2023 08:14:56 -0800 (PST) From: Qais Yousef To: Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Vincent Guittot , Dietmar Eggemann Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lukasz Luba , Wei Wang , Xuewen Yan , Hank , Jonathan JMChen , Qais Yousef Subject: [PATCH 1/3] sched/uclamp: Set max_spare_cap_cpu even if max_spare_cap is 0 Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:14:42 +0000 Message-Id: <20230129161444.1674958-2-qyousef@layalina.io> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.25.1 In-Reply-To: <20230129161444.1674958-1-qyousef@layalina.io> References: <20230129161444.1674958-1-qyousef@layalina.io> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org When uclamp_max is being used, the util of the task could be higher than the spare capacity of the CPU, but due to uclamp_max value we force fit it there. The way the condition for checking for max_spare_cap in find_energy_efficient_cpu() was constructed; it ignored any CPU that has its spare_cap less than or _equal_ to max_spare_cap. Since we initialize max_spare_cap to 0; this lead to never setting max_spare_cap_cpu and hence ending up never performing compute_energy() for this cluster and missing an opportunity for a better energy efficient placement to honour uclamp_max setting. max_spare_cap = 0; cpu_cap = capacity_of(cpu) - task_util(p); // 0 if task_util(p) is high ... util_fits_cpu(...); // will return true if uclamp_max forces it to fit ... // this logic will fail to update max_spare_cap_cpu if cpu_cap is 0 if (cpu_cap > max_spare_cap) { max_spare_cap = cpu_cap; max_spare_cap_cpu = cpu; } prev_spare_cap suffers from a similar problem. Fix the logic by treating -1UL value as 'not populated' instead of 0 which is a viable and correct spare capacity value. Fixes: 1d42509e475c ("sched/fair: Make EAS wakeup placement consider uclamp restrictions") Signed-off-by: Qais Yousef (Google) --- kernel/sched/fair.c | 14 ++++++++------ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c index e29e9ea4cde8..ca2c389d3180 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c @@ -7390,9 +7390,9 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu) for (; pd; pd = pd->next) { unsigned long util_min = p_util_min, util_max = p_util_max; unsigned long cpu_cap, cpu_thermal_cap, util; - unsigned long cur_delta, max_spare_cap = 0; + unsigned long cur_delta, max_spare_cap = -1UL; unsigned long rq_util_min, rq_util_max; - unsigned long prev_spare_cap = 0; + unsigned long prev_spare_cap = -1UL; int max_spare_cap_cpu = -1; unsigned long base_energy; int fits, max_fits = -1; @@ -7457,7 +7457,8 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu) prev_spare_cap = cpu_cap; prev_fits = fits; } else if ((fits > max_fits) || - ((fits == max_fits) && (cpu_cap > max_spare_cap))) { + ((fits == max_fits) && + (cpu_cap > max_spare_cap || max_spare_cap == -1UL) { /* * Find the CPU with the maximum spare capacity * among the remaining CPUs in the performance @@ -7469,7 +7470,7 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu) } } - if (max_spare_cap_cpu < 0 && prev_spare_cap == 0) + if (max_spare_cap_cpu < 0 && prev_spare_cap == -1UL) continue; eenv_pd_busy_time(&eenv, cpus, p); @@ -7477,7 +7478,7 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu) base_energy = compute_energy(&eenv, pd, cpus, p, -1); /* Evaluate the energy impact of using prev_cpu. */ - if (prev_spare_cap > 0) { + if (prev_spare_cap != -1UL) { prev_delta = compute_energy(&eenv, pd, cpus, p, prev_cpu); /* CPU utilization has changed */ @@ -7489,7 +7490,8 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu) } /* Evaluate the energy impact of using max_spare_cap_cpu. */ - if (max_spare_cap_cpu >= 0 && max_spare_cap > prev_spare_cap) { + if (max_spare_cap_cpu >= 0 && + (max_spare_cap > prev_spare_cap || prev_spare_cap == -1UL)) { /* Current best energy cpu fits better */ if (max_fits < best_fits) continue; -- 2.25.1