Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-180752-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240508172621.30069-1-ppbuk5246@gmail.com> <20240509092931.35209-2-ppbuk5246@gmail.com>
 <ZkU8lm2tjm_r9FpZ@pavilion.home> <20240516075628.GC22557@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
In-Reply-To: <20240516075628.GC22557@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
From: Yun Levi <ppbuk5246@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2024 09:20:08 +0100
Message-ID: <CAM7-yPRHp3tiZjuBTesdRQoU8WJNg1scon_txS_6R-pZq9MXHw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] time/tick-sched: idle load balancing when nohz_full
 cpu becomes idle.
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>, Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>, 
	Vineeth Pillai <vineeth@bitbyteword.org>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>, 
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>, anna-maria@linutronix.de, mingo@kernel.org, 
	tglx@linutronix.de, Markus.Elfring@web.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

> None of that HK nonsense is relevant. The NOHZ_FULL nonsense implies
> single CPU partitions, and *that* should be avoiding any and all
> load-balancing.

Do you mean.. tick_nohz_full cpu (non-HK-ticked cpu) shouldn't belong
to any sched_domain?


>
> If there still is, that's a bug, but that's not related to HK goo.
>
> As such, I don't think the HK_TYPE_SCHED check in
> nohz_balance_enter_idle() actually makes sense, the on_null_omain()
> check a little below that should already take care of things, no?

IIUC,
currently, whether cpu belongs on domain or null is determined by
HK_DOMAIN_FLAGS
However, when "nohz_full=" is used, it still on HK_DOMAIN, so it
belongs to sched_domain
so, it couldn't be filtered out by on_null_domain().

unless "isolcpus=domain" or "isolcpus={cpu_list}", it's on null domain.
with "isolcpus=tick", it participates sched_domain.