Re: [PATCH v2] sched: make update_sd_pick_busiest return true on a busier sd

From: Vincent Guittot
Date: Mon Jul 28 2014 - 04:23:32 EST


On 25 July 2014 21:32, Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Subject: sched: make update_sd_pick_busiest return true on a busier sd
>
> Currently update_sd_pick_busiest only identifies the busiest sd
> that is either overloaded, or has a group imbalance. When no
> sd is imbalanced or overloaded, the load balancer fails to find
> the busiest domain.
>
> This breaks load balancing between domains that are not overloaded,
> in the !SD_ASYM_PACKING case. This patch makes update_sd_pick_busiest
> return true when the busiest sd yet is encountered.
>
> Behaviour for SD_ASYM_PACKING does not seem to match the comment,
> but I have no hardware to test that so I have left the behaviour
> of that code unchanged.
>
> It is unclear what to do with the group_imb condition.
> Should group_imb override a busier load? If so, should we fix

IMHO, group_imb should have a lower priority compared to overloaded
group because it generates active migration whereas the use of
overloaded group could solve the imbalance with normal migration
Then, AFAICT, we already have a special way to compute imbalance when
group_imb is set

> calculate_imbalance to return a sensible number when the "busiest"
> node found has a below average load? We probably need to fix
> calculate_imbalance anyway, to deal with an overloaded group that
> happens to have a below average load...
>
> Cc: mikey@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 18 +++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 45943b2..c96044f 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -5949,6 +5949,11 @@ static inline void update_sg_lb_stats(struct lb_env *env,
> sgs->group_has_free_capacity = 1;
> }
>
> +static bool group_overloaded(struct sg_lb_stats *sgs)
> +{
> + return sgs->sum_nr_running > sgs->group_capacity_factor;
> +}
> +
> /**
> * update_sd_pick_busiest - return 1 on busiest group
> * @env: The load balancing environment.
> @@ -5957,7 +5962,7 @@ static inline void update_sg_lb_stats(struct lb_env *env,
> * @sgs: sched_group statistics
> *
> * Determine if @sg is a busier group than the previously selected
> - * busiest group.
> + * busiest group.
> *
> * Return: %true if @sg is a busier group than the previously selected
> * busiest group. %false otherwise.
> @@ -5967,13 +5972,17 @@ static bool update_sd_pick_busiest(struct lb_env *env,
> struct sched_group *sg,
> struct sg_lb_stats *sgs)
> {
> + if (group_overloaded(sgs) && !group_overloaded(&sds->busiest_stat))

The 1st time you run update_sd_pick_busiest, group_capacity_factor and
sum_nr_running of sds->busiest_stat are uninitialized.

> + return true;
> +

IIUC your new test sequence, you haven't solved the following use case:

group A has 3 tasks and is overloaded
group B has 2 tasks and is not overloaded but its avg_load is higher
than group B (either because of nice priority or because of average
runnable time)

The test of group A will return true because it is overloaded and not
the empty busiest_stat
But, the test of group B will also return true because of
!(env->sd->flags & SD_ASYM_PACKING)

So at the end you are selecting the group B which is not overloaded

> if (sgs->avg_load <= sds->busiest_stat.avg_load)
> return false;
>
> - if (sgs->sum_nr_running > sgs->group_capacity_factor)
> + if (sgs->group_imb)
> return true;
>
> - if (sgs->group_imb)
> + /* This is the busiest node. */
> + if (!(env->sd->flags & SD_ASYM_PACKING))
> return true;
>
> /*
> @@ -5981,8 +5990,7 @@ static bool update_sd_pick_busiest(struct lb_env *env,
> * numbered CPUs in the group, therefore mark all groups
> * higher than ourself as busy.
> */
> - if ((env->sd->flags & SD_ASYM_PACKING) && sgs->sum_nr_running &&
> - env->dst_cpu < group_first_cpu(sg)) {
> + if (sgs->sum_nr_running && env->dst_cpu < group_first_cpu(sg)) {
> if (!sds->busiest)
> return true;
>
>
--
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/