Re: [patch v8 6/9] sched: compute runnable load avg in cpu_load and cpu_avg_load_per_task
From: Paul Turner
Date: Mon Jun 17 2013 - 08:17:54 EST
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 3:51 AM, Paul Turner <pjt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 12:20 AM, Alex Shi <alex.shi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> They are the base values in load balance, update them with rq runnable
>> load average, then the load balance will consider runnable load avg
>> naturally.
>>
>> We also try to include the blocked_load_avg as cpu load in balancing,
>> but that cause kbuild performance drop 6% on every Intel machine, and
>> aim7/oltp drop on some of 4 CPU sockets machines.
>>
>
> This looks fine.
>
> Did you try including blocked_load_avg in only get_rq_runnable_load()
> [ and not weighted_cpuload() which is called by new-idle ]?
Looking at this more this feels less correct since you're taking
averages of averages.
This was previously discussed at:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/5/6/109
And you later replied suggesting this didn't seem to hurt; what's the
current status there?
>
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> kernel/sched/fair.c | 5 +++--
>> kernel/sched/proc.c | 17 +++++++++++++++--
>> 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index 42c7be0..eadd2e7 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -2962,7 +2962,7 @@ static void dequeue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
>> /* Used instead of source_load when we know the type == 0 */
>> static unsigned long weighted_cpuload(const int cpu)
>> {
>> - return cpu_rq(cpu)->load.weight;
>> + return cpu_rq(cpu)->cfs.runnable_load_avg;
>> }
>>
>> /*
>> @@ -3007,9 +3007,10 @@ static unsigned long cpu_avg_load_per_task(int cpu)
>> {
>> struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
>> unsigned long nr_running = ACCESS_ONCE(rq->nr_running);
>> + unsigned long load_avg = rq->cfs.runnable_load_avg;
>>
>> if (nr_running)
>> - return rq->load.weight / nr_running;
>> + return load_avg / nr_running;
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/proc.c b/kernel/sched/proc.c
>> index bb3a6a0..ce5cd48 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/proc.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/proc.c
>> @@ -501,6 +501,18 @@ static void __update_cpu_load(struct rq *this_rq, unsigned long this_load,
>> sched_avg_update(this_rq);
>> }
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
>> +unsigned long get_rq_runnable_load(struct rq *rq)
>> +{
>> + return rq->cfs.runnable_load_avg;
>> +}
>> +#else
>> +unsigned long get_rq_runnable_load(struct rq *rq)
>> +{
>> + return rq->load.weight;
>> +}
>> +#endif
>> +
>> #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON
>> /*
>> * There is no sane way to deal with nohz on smp when using jiffies because the
>> @@ -522,7 +534,7 @@ static void __update_cpu_load(struct rq *this_rq, unsigned long this_load,
>> void update_idle_cpu_load(struct rq *this_rq)
>> {
>> unsigned long curr_jiffies = ACCESS_ONCE(jiffies);
>> - unsigned long load = this_rq->load.weight;
>> + unsigned long load = get_rq_runnable_load(this_rq);
>> unsigned long pending_updates;
>>
>> /*
>> @@ -568,11 +580,12 @@ void update_cpu_load_nohz(void)
>> */
>> void update_cpu_load_active(struct rq *this_rq)
>> {
>> + unsigned long load = get_rq_runnable_load(this_rq);
>> /*
>> * See the mess around update_idle_cpu_load() / update_cpu_load_nohz().
>> */
>> this_rq->last_load_update_tick = jiffies;
>> - __update_cpu_load(this_rq, this_rq->load.weight, 1);
>> + __update_cpu_load(this_rq, load, 1);
>>
>> calc_load_account_active(this_rq);
>> }
>> --
>> 1.7.12
>>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/