LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"Clark Williams" <williams@redhat.com>,
	linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Mike Galbraith" <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Jörn Engel" <joern@purestorage.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v2] sched/rt: Use IPI to trigger RT task push migration instead of pulling
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 08:49:07 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150226074907.GQ21418@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150225125015.6c5110ca@gandalf.local.home>

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:50:15PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > Well, the problem with it is one of collisions. So the 'easy' solution I
> > proposed would be something like:
> > 
> > int ips_next(struct ipi_pull_struct *ips)
> > {
> > 	int cpu = ips->src_cpu;
> > 	cpu = cpumask_next(cpu, rto_mask);
> > 	if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids) {
> 
> Do we really need to loop? Just start with the first one, and go to the
> end.
> 
> > 		cpu = 0;
> > 		ips->flags |= IPS_LOOPED;
> > 		cpu = cpumask_next(cpu, rto_mask);
> > 		if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids) /* empty mask *;
> > 			return cpu;
> > 	}
> > 	if (ips->flags & IPS_LOOPED && cpu >= ips->stop_cpu)
> > 		return nr_cpu_ids;
> > 	return cpu;
> > }

Yes, notice that we don't start iterating at the beginning; this in on
purpose. If we start iterating at the beginning, _every_ cpu will again
pile up on the first one.

By starting at the current cpu, each cpu will start iteration some place
else and hopefully, with a big enough system, different CPUs end up on a
different rto cpu.

> > 
> > 
> > 	struct ipi_pull_struct *ips = __this_cpu_ptr(ips);
> > 
> > 	raw_spin_lock(&ips->lock);
> > 	if (ips->flags & IPS_BUSY) {
> > 		/* there is an IPI active; update state */
> > 		ips->dst_prio = current->prio;
> > 		ips->stop_cpu = ips->src_cpu;
> > 		ips->flags &= ~IPS_LOOPED;
> 
> I guess the loop is needed for continuing the work, in case the
> scheduling changed?

That too.

> > 	} else {
> > 		/* no IPI active, make one go */
> > 		ips->dst_cpu = smp_processor_id();
> > 		ips->dst_prio = current->prio;
> > 		ips->src_cpu = ips->dst_cpu;
> > 		ips->stop_cpu = ips->dst_cpu;
> > 		ips->flags = IPS_BUSY;
> > 
> > 		cpu = ips_next(ips);
> > 		ips->src_cpu = cpu;
> > 		if (cpu < nr_cpu_ids)
> > 			irq_work_queue_on(&ips->work, cpu);
> > 	}
> > 	raw_spin_unlock(&ips->lock);
> 
> I'll have to spend some time comprehending this.

:-)

> > Where you would simply start walking the RTO mask from the current
> > position -- it also includes some restart logic, and you'd only take
> > ips->lock when your ipi handler starts and when it needs to migrate to
> > another cpu.
> > 
> > This way, on big systems, there's at least some chance different CPUs
> > find different targets to pull from.
> 
> OK, makes sense. I can try that.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-02-26  7:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-02-24 18:39 Steven Rostedt
2015-02-24 18:45 ` Steven Rostedt
2015-02-24 21:23 ` Steven Rostedt
2015-02-25 10:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-25 15:51   ` Steven Rostedt
2015-02-25 17:11     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-25 17:41       ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-25 17:50       ` Steven Rostedt
2015-02-26  7:45         ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-26 12:43           ` Steven Rostedt
2015-02-26 13:47             ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-26 14:00               ` Steven Rostedt
2015-02-26  7:49         ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-02-26 12:46           ` Steven Rostedt
2015-02-25  7:56 Hillf Danton

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20150226074907.GQ21418@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=joern@purestorage.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com \
    --cc=williams@redhat.com \
    --subject='Re: [RFC][PATCH v2] sched/rt: Use IPI to trigger RT task push migration instead of pulling' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).