Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1698754
| From | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH V6] sched/fair: Remove group imbalance from calculate_imbalance() |
| Date | 2017-07-28 15:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <u8d22-3Rv-17@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <u2Srg-1rA-31@gated-at.bofh.it> <u4GFk-6zi-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <u7vX5-1Cp-39@gated-at.bofh.it> <u8cpk-3E3-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 01:16:24PM +0100, Dietmar Eggemann wrote: > >> IIRC the topology you had in mind was MC + DIE level with n (n > 2) DIE > >> level sched groups. > > > > That'd be a NUMA box? > > I don't think it's NUMA. SD level are MC, DIE w/ # DIE sg's >> 2. Ah, I can't read. I thought >2 DIEs. > > So this is 4 * 18 * 2 = 144 cpus: > > Impressive ;-) Takes forever to boot though :/ > > If I then start a 3rd loop, I see 100% 50%,50%. I then kill the 100%. > > Then instantly they balance and I get 2x100% back. > > Yeah, could reproduce on IVB-EP (2x10x2). OK, I have one of those. What should I do, because I didn't actually see anything odd. > > Anything else I need to reproduce? (other than maybe a slightly less > > insane machine :-) > > I guess what Jeff is trying to avoid is that 'busiest->load_per_task' > lowered to 'sds->avg_load' in case of an imbalanced busiest sg: > > if (busiest->group_type == group_imbalanced) > busiest->load_per_task = min(busiest->load_per_task, sds->avg_load); > > is so low that later fix_small_imbalance() won't be called and > 'env->imbalance' stays so low that load-balance of on 50% task to the > now idle cpu won't happen. > > if (env->imbalance < busiest->load_per_task) > fix_small_imbalance(env, sds); > > Having really a lot of otherwise idle DIE sg's helps to keep > 'sds->avg_load' low in comparison to 'busiest->load_per_task'. Right, but the whole load_per_task thing is a bit wonky, and since that's the basis of fix_small_imbalance() I'm very suspect.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH V6] sched/fair: Remove group imbalance from calculate_imbalance() Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> - 2017-07-18 21:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH V6] sched/fair: Remove group imbalance from calculate_imbalance() Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-07-26 17:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH V6] sched/fair: Remove group imbalance from calculate_imbalance() Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> - 2017-07-28 14:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH V6] sched/fair: Remove group imbalance from calculate_imbalance() Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-07-28 15:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH V6] sched/fair: Remove group imbalance from calculate_imbalance() Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> - 2017-07-28 15:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH V6] sched/fair: Remove group imbalance from calculate_imbalance() Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@codeaurora.org> - 2017-07-28 20:10 +0200
csiph-web