Thread (39 messages) 39 messages, 5 authors, 2014-11-26

[PATCH v9 10/10] sched: move cfs task on a CPU with higher capacity

From: Morten Rasmussen <hidden>
Date: 2014-11-21 12:36:51
Also in: lkml

On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 04:54:47PM +0000, Vincent Guittot wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
When a CPU is used to handle a lot of IRQs or some RT tasks, the remaining
capacity for CFS tasks can be significantly reduced. Once we detect such
situation by comparing cpu_capacity_orig and cpu_capacity, we trig an idle
load balance to check if it's worth moving its tasks on an idle CPU.

Once the idle load_balance has selected the busiest CPU, it will look for an
active load balance for only two cases :
- there is only 1 task on the busiest CPU.
- we haven't been able to move a task of the busiest rq.

A CPU with a reduced capacity is included in the 1st case, and it's worth to
actively migrate its task if the idle CPU has got full capacity. This test has
been added in need_active_balance.

As a sidenote, this will note generate more spurious ilb because we already
trig an ilb if there is more than 1 busy cpu. If this cpu is the only one that
has a task, we will trig the ilb once for migrating the task.

The nohz_kick_needed function has been cleaned up a bit while adding the new
test

env.src_cpu and env.src_rq must be set unconditionnally because they are used
in need_active_balance which is called even if busiest->nr_running equals 1

Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
---
 kernel/sched/fair.c | 74 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index db392a6..02e8f7f 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -6634,6 +6634,28 @@ static int need_active_balance(struct lb_env *env)
 			return 1;
 	}
 
+	/*
+	 * The dst_cpu is idle and the src_cpu CPU has only 1 CFS task.
+	 * It's worth migrating the task if the src_cpu's capacity is reduced
+	 * because of other sched_class or IRQs whereas capacity stays
+	 * available on dst_cpu.
+	 */
+	if ((env->idle != CPU_NOT_IDLE) &&
+			(env->src_rq->cfs.h_nr_running == 1)) {
+		unsigned long src_eff_capacity, dst_eff_capacity;
+
+		dst_eff_capacity = 100;
+		dst_eff_capacity *= capacity_of(env->dst_cpu);
+		dst_eff_capacity *= capacity_orig_of(env->src_cpu);
+
+		src_eff_capacity = sd->imbalance_pct;
+		src_eff_capacity *= capacity_of(env->src_cpu);
+		src_eff_capacity *= capacity_orig_of(env->dst_cpu);
Do we need to scale by capacity_orig? Shouldn't the absolute capacity be
better?

if (capacity_of(env->src) * sd->imbalance_pct < capacity_of(env->dst) *
100) ?

Isn't it the absolute available capacity that matters? For SMP
capacity_orig is the same and cancels out and doesn't change anything.
For big.LITTLE we would rather have the task run on a big where rt/irq
eats 30% than a little cpu where rq/irq eats 5%, assuming big capacity
is much bigger than little capacity so the absolute available capacity
(~cycles/time) is larger on the big cpu.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help