Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 3 May 2023 19:13:17 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/1] sched: Consider CPU contention in frequency & load-balance busiest CPU selection | From | Dietmar Eggemann <> |
| |
On 29/04/2023 16:58, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 05:50:30PM +0200, Dietmar Eggemann wrote: >> Use new cpu_boosted_util_cfs() instead of cpu_util_cfs(). >> >> The former returns max(util_avg, runnable_avg) capped by max CPU >> capacity. CPU contention is thereby considered through runnable_avg. >> >> The change in load-balance only affects migration type `migrate_util`. > > But why, and how does it affect? That is, isn't this Changelog a wee bit > sparse?
Absolutely.
I have compelling test data based on JankbenchX on Pixel6 for sugov_get_util() case I will share with v2.
But for the find_busiest_queue() (lb migration_type = migrate_util) case it is tricky to create a test env.
`migrate_util` only operates in DIE or NUMA SD (!SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES) and the system should not be overloaded (spare capacity on the local group).
perf bench sched messaging with a small number of tasks compared to CPU number shows some improvement.
E.g. Ampere Altra with 160 CPUs, SDs = {MC, DIE, NUMA} and 1 group = 40 tasks shows some improvement:
perf stat --null --repeat 10 -- perf bench sched messaging -t -g 1 -l 2000
0.4869 +- 0.0173 seconds time elapsed ( +- 3.55% ) -> 0.4377 +- 0.0147 seconds time elapsed ( +- 3.36% )
If I put more tasks onto the machine, the conditions to go into `migrate_util` lb vanish so there is no difference.
Also if I test on an 8 CPUs system, SDs = {MC, DIE} and 1 group = 40 tasks the conditions to do migrate_util lb are only true for a short moment of the beginning of the test so it does not have much implication on the score.
[...]
| |