Date:   Mon, 13 Feb 2023 11:47:40 -0800
From:   Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
To:     Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Cc:     "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri@intel.com>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
        Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
        Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Tim C . Chen" <tim.c.chen@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/10] sched/fair: Do not even the number of busy CPUs
 via asym_packing
Message-ID: <20230213194740.GA6164@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com>
References: <20230207045838.11243-1-ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
 <20230207045838.11243-8-ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
 <f8a75f47-0f7e-14cc-adf4-2854e235b26e@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f8a75f47-0f7e-14cc-adf4-2854e235b26e@arm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 01:44:20PM +0100, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 07/02/2023 05:58, Ricardo Neri wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > @@ -9269,33 +9264,11 @@ static bool asym_smt_can_pull_tasks(int dst_cpu, struct sd_lb_stats *sds,
> >  				    struct sched_group *sg)
> >  {
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_SMT
> > -	bool local_is_smt;
> >  	int sg_busy_cpus;
> >  
> > -	local_is_smt = sds->local->flags & SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY;
> >  	sg_busy_cpus = sgs->group_weight - sgs->idle_cpus;
> >  
> > -	if (!local_is_smt) {
> > -		/*
> > -		 * If we are here, @dst_cpu is idle and does not have SMT
> > -		 * siblings. Pull tasks if candidate group has two or more
> > -		 * busy CPUs.
> > -		 */
> > -		if (sg_busy_cpus >= 2) /* implies sg_is_smt */
> > -			return true;
> > -
> > -		/*
> > -		 * @dst_cpu does not have SMT siblings. @sg may have SMT
> > -		 * siblings and only one is busy. In such case, @dst_cpu
> > -		 * can help if it has higher priority and is idle (i.e.,
> > -		 * it has no running tasks).
> > -		 */
> > -		return sched_asym_prefer(dst_cpu, sg->asym_prefer_cpu);
> > -	}
> > -
> >  	/*
> > -	 * @dst_cpu has SMT siblings and are also idle.
> > -	 *
> >  	 * If the difference in the number of busy CPUs is two or more, let
> >  	 * find_busiest_group() take care of it. We only care if @sg has
> >  	 * exactly one busy CPU. This covers SMT and non-SMT sched groups.
> 
> Can't this be made lighter by removing asym_smt_can_pull_tasks() and
> putting the logic to exclude the call to sched_asym_prefer() into
> sched_asym() directly?

Yes, you are right. asym_smt_can_pull_tasks() was simplified significantly.
I'll take your suggestion.

> Not sure if we need the CONFIG_SCHED_SMT since it's all guarded by
> `flags & SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY` already, which is only set under.
> CONFIG_SCHED_SMT.

Yes, asym_smt_can_pull_tasks() now cares for a very specific case, which
only happens with CONFIG_SCHED_SMT. I'll remove the !CONFIG_SCHED_SMT part.
> 
> static inline bool
> sched_asym(struct lb_env *env, struct sd_lb_stats *sds,
>            struct sg_lb_stats *sgs, struct sched_group *group)
> {
>         bool local_is_smt = sds->local->flags & SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY;
> 
>         if (local_is_smt && !is_core_idle(env->dst_cpu))
>                 return false;
> 
>         if ((local_is_smt || group->flags & SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY)) {
>                 int sg_busy_cpus = sgs->group_weight - sgs->idle_cpus;
> 
>                 if (sg_busy_cpus != 1)
>                         return false;
>         }
> 
>         return sched_asym_prefer(env->dst_cpu, group->asym_prefer_cpu);

I'll take your suggestion. Thanks!