Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230328092622.062917921@infradead.org> <20230328110354.141543852@infradead.org>
 <CABk29Nt4T67S+L9Qs1qeOUyo5gY1Qy5KuOwuCYNM74E58J81Eg@mail.gmail.com> <20230329081239.GM4253@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
In-Reply-To: <20230329081239.GM4253@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
From:   Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 29 Mar 2023 11:54:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CABk29Nud5dBo9ZdYhPLAPiVtQ9qh8aPOytydp7EXa-rYyYaMHA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/17] sched/fair: Implement an EEVDF like policy
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     mingo@kernel.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
        dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com,
        mgorman@suse.de, bristot@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net,
        qyousef@layalina.io, chris.hyser@oracle.com,
        patrick.bellasi@matbug.net, pjt@google.com, pavel@ucw.cz,
        qperret@google.com, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com, timj@gnu.org,
        kprateek.nayak@amd.com, yu.c.chen@intel.com,
        youssefesmat@chromium.org, joel@joelfernandes.org, efault@gmx.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 1:12=E2=80=AFAM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.or=
g> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 06:26:51PM -0700, Josh Don wrote:
>
> > > @@ -5088,19 +5307,20 @@ dequeue_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, st
> > >  static void
> > >  check_preempt_tick(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *curr)
> > >  {
> > > -       unsigned long ideal_runtime, delta_exec;
> > > +       unsigned long delta_exec;
> > >         struct sched_entity *se;
> > >         s64 delta;
> > >
> > > -       /*
> > > -        * When many tasks blow up the sched_period; it is possible t=
hat
> > > -        * sched_slice() reports unusually large results (when many t=
asks are
> > > -        * very light for example). Therefore impose a maximum.
> > > -        */
> > > -       ideal_runtime =3D min_t(u64, sched_slice(cfs_rq, curr), sysct=
l_sched_latency);
> > > +       if (sched_feat(EEVDF)) {
> > > +               if (pick_eevdf(cfs_rq) !=3D curr)
> > > +                       goto preempt;
> >
> > This could shortcircuit the loop in pick_eevdf once we find a best
> > that has less vruntime and sooner deadline than curr, since we know
> > we'll never pick curr in that case. Might help performance when we
> > have a large tree for this cfs_rq.
>
> Yeah, one of the things I did consider was having this set cfs_rq->next
> such that the reschedule pick doesn't have to do the pick again. But I
> figured keep things simple for now.

Yea that makes sense. I was thinking something similar along the lines
of cfs_rq->next as another way to avoid duplicate computation. But
agreed this can be a future optimization.