Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1361716
| From | tip-bot for Matt Fleming <tipbot@zytor.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | [tip:sched/urgent] sched/fair: Add comments to explain select_idle_sibling() |
| Date | 2016-03-21 12:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <rf62l-4MK-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <raNKF-Oc-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Commit-ID: d4335581dc30ec6545999c7443bb9fead274a980
Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/d4335581dc30ec6545999c7443bb9fead274a980
Author: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
AuthorDate: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 14:59:08 +0000
Committer: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
CommitDate: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:52:51 +0100
sched/fair: Add comments to explain select_idle_sibling()
It's not entirely obvious how the main loop in select_idle_sibling()
works on first glance. Sprinkle a few comments to explain the design
and intention behind the loop based on some conversations with Mike
and Peter.
Signed-off-by: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.com>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@suse.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1457535548-15329-1-git-send-email-matt@codeblueprint.co.uk
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
---
kernel/sched/fair.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 3c114d9..303d639 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -5055,7 +5055,19 @@ static int select_idle_sibling(struct task_struct *p, int target)
return i;
/*
- * Otherwise, iterate the domains and find an elegible idle cpu.
+ * Otherwise, iterate the domains and find an eligible idle cpu.
+ *
+ * A completely idle sched group at higher domains is more
+ * desirable than an idle group at a lower level, because lower
+ * domains have smaller groups and usually share hardware
+ * resources which causes tasks to contend on them, e.g. x86
+ * hyperthread siblings in the lowest domain (SMT) can contend
+ * on the shared cpu pipeline.
+ *
+ * However, while we prefer idle groups at higher domains
+ * finding an idle cpu at the lowest domain is still better than
+ * returning 'target', which we've already established, isn't
+ * idle.
*/
sd = rcu_dereference(per_cpu(sd_llc, target));
for_each_lower_domain(sd) {
@@ -5065,11 +5077,16 @@ static int select_idle_sibling(struct task_struct *p, int target)
tsk_cpus_allowed(p)))
goto next;
+ /* Ensure the entire group is idle */
for_each_cpu(i, sched_group_cpus(sg)) {
if (i == target || !idle_cpu(i))
goto next;
}
+ /*
+ * It doesn't matter which cpu we pick, the
+ * whole group is idle.
+ */
target = cpumask_first_and(sched_group_cpus(sg),
tsk_cpus_allowed(p));
goto done;
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
[tip:sched/urgent] sched/fair: Add comments to explain select_idle_sibling() tip-bot for Matt Fleming <tipbot@zytor.com> - 2016-03-21 12:20 +0100
csiph-web