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 C9F08C54EAA for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 14:14:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237316AbjA3OOK (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2023 09:14:10 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57686 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237294AbjA3OOF (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2023 09:14:05 -0500 Received: from mail-pf1-x435.google.com (mail-pf1-x435.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::435]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B68A718A9F for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 06:14:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pf1-x435.google.com with SMTP id g9so7775145pfo.5 for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 06:14:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=EFb3ucouMi9GeurBoPDb8PaQ5mb90zs5lh9a+AaIcnw=; b=FuFlIRNS+E1QUDugxLLaSi3shF29lNflcy61gnkJGBdv7+gkP3NwCiOrjK4jbn1B8t 2A4loP9hsfFAho5Y1fPthcruRpPXGnnaA+UakA5UXMB37DTyhdNw00nIoXs+4qSaWeCW zqdDmvI22sEdh+fhFiEsdlIb4zgIHCD67IVfRJMXG7b577i53QEKOFWOoFEx2DShTgCc Av89Xcnh9c4MxJO4kO8bixS0ia1jVYfO3PW//UnqjhzPqIPxb8N2Kf/wKeicHYuI5P8w amflROmaEV+JPEzolUbEaZuFZVLfBJXTzL2YtRdEfebEFyl0bJsbnqo0ABxd2Aazh+Kr 3NJg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=EFb3ucouMi9GeurBoPDb8PaQ5mb90zs5lh9a+AaIcnw=; b=FldS8Cwh1IEu+9w5iM9O9Sd9pL2KMmrsI4rHAid680JfhY0u3Onbj99ESdbqUpVNZj 9NZvYtY8kSTEDYuKV9vT1078NWI2fvptWEBdegvsKaa/LanfQha8HHFDXz+7EHz/0+3a c84i4nH4NDJw7P+CI19LRVsYSYggyzfPD6KpoLz71SCTfTHBjgYPllEuI/TA+w3xSq5h cFqT5o2DMlTJVmQOj9zQ/4C+badbjrV+BOkBqMIoYs1u4veI/EaqNfg7tbSb9DbFjFzh Vmf/4qPQi07NpEL0kWermTKK9LfuYYlFNJqEPZB7ewoIbYtgKI//+s25BJKUMp+EWDrM 2Mnw== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKV8ZF4XzRhR6NJl16mwfJ79jkRRAyqXq3ZPqEO1R2EdZgke1jOL bIORdf0wmhJdRKPCKCigLSi8MZs5yO3jbaBMzbV/AQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+kReaiwSXQCu6z1neyxlZltvwyN3CmZ0z55q1aPEpNG+yVbQLgz7sIVQQlJMf+/TKuzdy9mbr+yuhHHQ/q5IM= X-Received: by 2002:aa7:8381:0:b0:590:bfd1:b980 with SMTP id u1-20020aa78381000000b00590bfd1b980mr2431325pfm.64.1675088042025; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 06:14:02 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230119174244.2059628-1-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> <20230129163538.mxkr5ib2glqu36ww@airbuntu> In-Reply-To: <20230129163538.mxkr5ib2glqu36ww@airbuntu> From: Vincent Guittot Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 15:13:50 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] sched/fair: unlink misfit task from cpu overutilized To: Qais Yousef Cc: mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rafael@kernel.org, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, vschneid@redhat.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lukasz.luba@arm.com, wvw@google.com, xuewen.yan94@gmail.com, han.lin@mediatek.com, Jonathan.JMChen@mediatek.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 at 17:35, Qais Yousef wrote: > > On 01/19/23 18:42, Vincent Guittot wrote: > > By taking into account uclamp_min, the 1:1 relation between task misfit > > and cpu overutilized is no more true as a task with a small util_avg may > > not fit a high capacity cpu because of uclamp_min constraint. > > > > Add a new state in util_fits_cpu() to reflect the case that task would fit > > a CPU except for the uclamp_min hint which is a performance requirement. > > > > Use -1 to reflect that a CPU doesn't fit only because of uclamp_min so we > > can use this new value to take additional action to select the best CPU > > that doesn't match uclamp_min hint. > > > > Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot > > --- > > I did improve my unit test so that I look at overutilized and misfit condition. > > Of course I had to hack the kernel to expose something to manipulate the > thermal pressure signal. I also made sure to use the sched_energy_aware knob to > switch between using EAS/CAS so that both feec() and sic() are exercised. > > My test system is pinebook pro which has a simple 2 level capacities - but > I couldn't catch anything wrong. Only one unrelated failure - see below. > > I'd be happy to give this my Reviewed-and-tested-by. What's the plan for the > removal the capacity_inversion logic? Thanks for the Reviewed-and-tested-by. Regarding the removal of capacity_inversion logic , I don't know how Peter prefers to handle this in one step with this patch then the reverts or revert capacity_inversion logic in a 2nd step > > And nit: subject line could still be improved :) This is a lot more than > unlinking misfit from OU. > > > > > Change since v3: > > - Keep current condition for uclamp_max_fits in util_fits_cpu() > > - Update some comments > > > > kernel/sched/fair.c | 105 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > > 1 file changed, 82 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c > > index d4db72f8f84e..54e14da53274 100644 > > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c > > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c > > @@ -4561,8 +4561,8 @@ static inline int util_fits_cpu(unsigned long util, > > * handle the case uclamp_min > uclamp_max. > > */ > > uclamp_min = min(uclamp_min, uclamp_max); > > - if (util < uclamp_min && capacity_orig != SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE) > > - fits = fits && (uclamp_min <= capacity_orig_thermal); > > + if (fits && (util < uclamp_min) && (uclamp_min > capacity_orig_thermal)) > > + return -1; > > > > return fits; > > } > > @@ -4572,7 +4572,11 @@ static inline int task_fits_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int cpu) > > unsigned long uclamp_min = uclamp_eff_value(p, UCLAMP_MIN); > > unsigned long uclamp_max = uclamp_eff_value(p, UCLAMP_MAX); > > unsigned long util = task_util_est(p); > > - return util_fits_cpu(util, uclamp_min, uclamp_max, cpu); > > + /* > > + * Return true only if the cpu fully fits the task requirements, which > > + * include the utilization but also the performance hints. > > + */ > > + return (util_fits_cpu(util, uclamp_min, uclamp_max, cpu) > 0); > > } > > > > static inline void update_misfit_status(struct task_struct *p, struct rq *rq) > > @@ -6138,6 +6142,7 @@ static inline bool cpu_overutilized(int cpu) > > unsigned long rq_util_min = uclamp_rq_get(cpu_rq(cpu), UCLAMP_MIN); > > unsigned long rq_util_max = uclamp_rq_get(cpu_rq(cpu), UCLAMP_MAX); > > > > + /* Return true only if the utilization doesn't fits CPU's capacity */ > > return !util_fits_cpu(cpu_util_cfs(cpu), rq_util_min, rq_util_max, cpu); > > } > > > > @@ -6931,6 +6936,7 @@ static int > > select_idle_capacity(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int target) > > { > > unsigned long task_util, util_min, util_max, best_cap = 0; > > + int fits, best_fits = 0; > > int cpu, best_cpu = -1; > > struct cpumask *cpus; > > > > @@ -6946,12 +6952,28 @@ select_idle_capacity(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int target) > > > > if (!available_idle_cpu(cpu) && !sched_idle_cpu(cpu)) > > continue; > > - if (util_fits_cpu(task_util, util_min, util_max, cpu)) > > + > > + fits = util_fits_cpu(task_util, util_min, util_max, cpu); > > + > > + /* This CPU fits with all requirements */ > > + if (fits > 0) > > return cpu; > > + /* > > + * Only the min performance hint (i.e. uclamp_min) doesn't fit. > > + * Look for the CPU with best capacity. > > + */ > > + else if (fits < 0) > > + cpu_cap = capacity_orig_of(cpu) - thermal_load_avg(cpu_rq(cpu)); > > > > - if (cpu_cap > best_cap) { > > + /* > > + * First, select CPU which fits better (-1 being better than 0). > > + * Then, select the one with best capacity at same level. > > + */ > > + if ((fits < best_fits) || > > + ((fits == best_fits) && (cpu_cap > best_cap))) { > > best_cap = cpu_cap; > > best_cpu = cpu; > > + best_fits = fits; > > } > > } > > Not something you introduced, but I had a 'failure' case when I ran a task with > (uclamp_min, uclamp_max) = (1024, 1024) followed by (0, 0) in CAS. > > The task was basically stuck on big core and I check if the task can run on the > smallest possible capacity in my test. > > This is a separate problem that we should address out of this patch. One can > argue CAS is not energy aware, so any fitting cpu is okay. But one of the goals > of uclamp_max is to help keep some busy tasks away from bigger cores when > possible - not only for power reasons, but also for perf reasons as they can > 'steal' resources from other tasks. So the lack of a more comprehensive search > is a weakness and something we can improve on. > > feec() behaves fine - but after applying some fixes that I've been sleeping on > for a bit. Should see them in your inbox now. > > Thanks for the patch! I am still wary of the complexity, but the fallback > search could lead to better placement results now. > > > Cheers > > -- > Qais Yousef > > > > > @@ -6964,7 +6986,11 @@ static inline bool asym_fits_cpu(unsigned long util, > > int cpu) > > { > > if (sched_asym_cpucap_active()) > > - return util_fits_cpu(util, util_min, util_max, cpu); > > + /* > > + * Return true only if the cpu fully fits the task requirements > > + * which include the utilization and the performance hints. > > + */ > > + return (util_fits_cpu(util, util_min, util_max, cpu) > 0); > > > > return true; > > } > > @@ -7331,6 +7357,9 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu) > > unsigned long p_util_max = uclamp_is_used() ? uclamp_eff_value(p, UCLAMP_MAX) : 1024; > > struct root_domain *rd = this_rq()->rd; > > int cpu, best_energy_cpu, target = -1; > > + int prev_fits = -1, best_fits = -1; > > + unsigned long best_thermal_cap = 0; > > + unsigned long prev_thermal_cap = 0; > > struct sched_domain *sd; > > struct perf_domain *pd; > > struct energy_env eenv; > > @@ -7366,6 +7395,7 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu) > > unsigned long prev_spare_cap = 0; > > int max_spare_cap_cpu = -1; > > unsigned long base_energy; > > + int fits, max_fits = -1; > > > > cpumask_and(cpus, perf_domain_span(pd), cpu_online_mask); > > > > @@ -7418,7 +7448,9 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu) > > util_max = max(rq_util_max, p_util_max); > > } > > } > > - if (!util_fits_cpu(util, util_min, util_max, cpu)) > > + > > + fits = util_fits_cpu(util, util_min, util_max, cpu); > > + if (!fits) > > continue; > > > > lsub_positive(&cpu_cap, util); > > @@ -7426,7 +7458,9 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu) > > if (cpu == prev_cpu) { > > /* Always use prev_cpu as a candidate. */ > > prev_spare_cap = cpu_cap; > > - } else if (cpu_cap > max_spare_cap) { > > + prev_fits = fits; > > + } else if ((fits > max_fits) || > > + ((fits == max_fits) && (cpu_cap > max_spare_cap))) { > > /* > > * Find the CPU with the maximum spare capacity > > * among the remaining CPUs in the performance > > @@ -7434,6 +7468,7 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu) > > */ > > max_spare_cap = cpu_cap; > > max_spare_cap_cpu = cpu; > > + max_fits = fits; > > } > > } > > > > @@ -7452,26 +7487,50 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu) > > if (prev_delta < base_energy) > > goto unlock; > > prev_delta -= base_energy; > > + prev_thermal_cap = cpu_thermal_cap; > > best_delta = min(best_delta, prev_delta); > > } > > > > /* Evaluate the energy impact of using max_spare_cap_cpu. */ > > if (max_spare_cap_cpu >= 0 && max_spare_cap > prev_spare_cap) { > > + /* Current best energy cpu fits better */ > > + if (max_fits < best_fits) > > + continue; > > + > > + /* > > + * Both don't fit performance hint (i.e. uclamp_min) > > + * but best energy cpu has better capacity. > > + */ > > + if ((max_fits < 0) && > > + (cpu_thermal_cap <= best_thermal_cap)) > > + continue; > > + > > cur_delta = compute_energy(&eenv, pd, cpus, p, > > max_spare_cap_cpu); > > /* CPU utilization has changed */ > > if (cur_delta < base_energy) > > goto unlock; > > cur_delta -= base_energy; > > - if (cur_delta < best_delta) { > > - best_delta = cur_delta; > > - best_energy_cpu = max_spare_cap_cpu; > > - } > > + > > + /* > > + * Both fit for the task but best energy cpu has lower > > + * energy impact. > > + */ > > + if ((max_fits > 0) && (best_fits > 0) && > > + (cur_delta >= best_delta)) > > + continue; > > + > > + best_delta = cur_delta; > > + best_energy_cpu = max_spare_cap_cpu; > > + best_fits = max_fits; > > + best_thermal_cap = cpu_thermal_cap; > > } > > } > > rcu_read_unlock(); > > > > - if (best_delta < prev_delta) > > + if ((best_fits > prev_fits) || > > + ((best_fits > 0) && (best_delta < prev_delta)) || > > + ((best_fits < 0) && (best_thermal_cap > prev_thermal_cap))) > > target = best_energy_cpu; > > > > return target; > > @@ -10265,24 +10324,23 @@ static struct sched_group *find_busiest_group(struct lb_env *env) > > */ > > update_sd_lb_stats(env, &sds); > > > > - if (sched_energy_enabled()) { > > - struct root_domain *rd = env->dst_rq->rd; > > - > > - if (rcu_dereference(rd->pd) && !READ_ONCE(rd->overutilized)) > > - goto out_balanced; > > - } > > - > > - local = &sds.local_stat; > > - busiest = &sds.busiest_stat; > > - > > /* There is no busy sibling group to pull tasks from */ > > if (!sds.busiest) > > goto out_balanced; > > > > + busiest = &sds.busiest_stat; > > + > > /* Misfit tasks should be dealt with regardless of the avg load */ > > if (busiest->group_type == group_misfit_task) > > goto force_balance; > > > > + if (sched_energy_enabled()) { > > + struct root_domain *rd = env->dst_rq->rd; > > + > > + if (rcu_dereference(rd->pd) && !READ_ONCE(rd->overutilized)) > > + goto out_balanced; > > + } > > + > > /* ASYM feature bypasses nice load balance check */ > > if (busiest->group_type == group_asym_packing) > > goto force_balance; > > @@ -10295,6 +10353,7 @@ static struct sched_group *find_busiest_group(struct lb_env *env) > > if (busiest->group_type == group_imbalanced) > > goto force_balance; > > > > + local = &sds.local_stat; > > /* > > * If the local group is busier than the selected busiest group > > * don't try and pull any tasks. > > -- > > 2.34.1 > >