LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
	vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com
Subject: [PATCH v2 3/9] sched: Remove checks against SD_LOAD_BALANCE
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 18:15:55 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200311181601.18314-4-valentin.schneider@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200311181601.18314-1-valentin.schneider@arm.com>

Potential users of that flag could have been cpusets and isolcpus.

cpusets don't need it because they define exclusive (i.e. non-overlapping)
domain spans, see cpuset.cpu_exclusive and cpuset.sched_load_balance.
If such a cpuset contains a single CPU, it will have the NULL domain
attached to it. If it contains several CPUs, none of their domains will
extend beyond the span of the cpuset.

isolcpus apply the same "trick": isolated CPUs are explicitly taken out of
the sched_domain rebuild (using housekeeping_cpumask()), so they get the
NULL domain treatment as well.

The sched_domain systcl interface was the only way to clear that flag, and
it has just been made read-only. Since sd_init() sets it unconditionally,
remove the checks.

Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
---
 kernel/sched/fair.c     | 14 ++------------
 kernel/sched/topology.c | 28 +++++++++-------------------
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 1c3311277fb3..f8eb950fbefd 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -6609,9 +6609,6 @@ select_task_rq_fair(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu, int sd_flag, int wake_f
 
 	rcu_read_lock();
 	for_each_domain(cpu, tmp) {
-		if (!(tmp->flags & SD_LOAD_BALANCE))
-			break;
-
 		/*
 		 * If both 'cpu' and 'prev_cpu' are part of this domain,
 		 * cpu is a valid SD_WAKE_AFFINE target.
@@ -9723,9 +9720,8 @@ static int active_load_balance_cpu_stop(void *data)
 	/* Search for an sd spanning us and the target CPU. */
 	rcu_read_lock();
 	for_each_domain(target_cpu, sd) {
-		if ((sd->flags & SD_LOAD_BALANCE) &&
-		    cpumask_test_cpu(busiest_cpu, sched_domain_span(sd)))
-				break;
+		if (cpumask_test_cpu(busiest_cpu, sched_domain_span(sd)))
+			break;
 	}
 
 	if (likely(sd)) {
@@ -9814,9 +9810,6 @@ static void rebalance_domains(struct rq *rq, enum cpu_idle_type idle)
 		}
 		max_cost += sd->max_newidle_lb_cost;
 
-		if (!(sd->flags & SD_LOAD_BALANCE))
-			continue;
-
 		/*
 		 * Stop the load balance at this level. There is another
 		 * CPU in our sched group which is doing load balancing more
@@ -10405,9 +10398,6 @@ int newidle_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
 		int continue_balancing = 1;
 		u64 t0, domain_cost;
 
-		if (!(sd->flags & SD_LOAD_BALANCE))
-			continue;
-
 		if (this_rq->avg_idle < curr_cost + sd->max_newidle_lb_cost) {
 			update_next_balance(sd, &next_balance);
 			break;
diff --git a/kernel/sched/topology.c b/kernel/sched/topology.c
index 00911884b7e7..79a85827be2f 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/topology.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/topology.c
@@ -33,14 +33,6 @@ static int sched_domain_debug_one(struct sched_domain *sd, int cpu, int level,
 	cpumask_clear(groupmask);
 
 	printk(KERN_DEBUG "%*s domain-%d: ", level, "", level);
-
-	if (!(sd->flags & SD_LOAD_BALANCE)) {
-		printk("does not load-balance\n");
-		if (sd->parent)
-			printk(KERN_ERR "ERROR: !SD_LOAD_BALANCE domain has parent");
-		return -1;
-	}
-
 	printk(KERN_CONT "span=%*pbl level=%s\n",
 	       cpumask_pr_args(sched_domain_span(sd)), sd->name);
 
@@ -151,8 +143,7 @@ static int sd_degenerate(struct sched_domain *sd)
 		return 1;
 
 	/* Following flags need at least 2 groups */
-	if (sd->flags & (SD_LOAD_BALANCE |
-			 SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE |
+	if (sd->flags & (SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE |
 			 SD_BALANCE_FORK |
 			 SD_BALANCE_EXEC |
 			 SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY |
@@ -183,15 +174,14 @@ sd_parent_degenerate(struct sched_domain *sd, struct sched_domain *parent)
 
 	/* Flags needing groups don't count if only 1 group in parent */
 	if (parent->groups == parent->groups->next) {
-		pflags &= ~(SD_LOAD_BALANCE |
-				SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE |
-				SD_BALANCE_FORK |
-				SD_BALANCE_EXEC |
-				SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY |
-				SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY |
-				SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES |
-				SD_PREFER_SIBLING |
-				SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN);
+		pflags &= ~(SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE |
+			    SD_BALANCE_FORK |
+			    SD_BALANCE_EXEC |
+			    SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY |
+			    SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY |
+			    SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES |
+			    SD_PREFER_SIBLING |
+			    SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN);
 		if (nr_node_ids == 1)
 			pflags &= ~SD_SERIALIZE;
 	}
-- 
2.24.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-03-11 18:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-11 18:15 [PATCH v2 0/9] sched: Streamline select_task_rq() & select_task_rq_fair() Valentin Schneider
2020-03-11 18:15 ` [PATCH v2 1/9] sched/fair: find_idlest_group(): Remove unused sd_flag parameter Valentin Schneider
2020-03-19  9:05   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-03-11 18:15 ` [PATCH v2 2/9] sched/debug: Make sd->flags sysctl read-only Valentin Schneider
2020-03-19  9:07   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-03-19 12:04     ` Valentin Schneider
2020-03-11 18:15 ` Valentin Schneider [this message]
2020-03-19 10:28   ` [PATCH v2 3/9] sched: Remove checks against SD_LOAD_BALANCE Dietmar Eggemann
2020-03-19 12:05     ` Valentin Schneider
2020-03-23 14:26       ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-03-23 17:17         ` Valentin Schneider
2020-03-11 18:15 ` [PATCH v2 4/9] sched/topology: Kill SD_LOAD_BALANCE Valentin Schneider
2020-03-19 10:29   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-03-19 12:06     ` Valentin Schneider
2020-03-11 18:15 ` [PATCH v2 5/9] sched: Add WF_TTWU, WF_EXEC wakeup flags Valentin Schneider
2020-03-11 18:15 ` [PATCH v2 6/9] sched: Kill select_task_rq()'s sd_flag parameter Valentin Schneider
2020-03-11 18:15 ` [PATCH v2 7/9] sched/fair: Dissociate wakeup decisions from SD flag value Valentin Schneider
2020-03-11 18:16 ` [PATCH v2 8/9] sched/fair: Split select_task_rq_fair want_affine logic Valentin Schneider
2020-03-19 10:30   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-03-19 12:06     ` Valentin Schneider
2020-03-11 18:16 ` [PATCH v2 9/9] sched/topology: Define and use shortcut pointers for wakeup sd_flag scan Valentin Schneider
2020-03-19 10:46   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-03-19 12:22     ` Valentin Schneider

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=20200311181601.18314-4-valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --to=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] sched: Remove checks against SD_LOAD_BALANCE' \
    /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).