Re: [RFCv3 PATCH 44/48] sched: Tipping point from energy-aware to conventional load balancing

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 06:31:21PM +0000, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@xxxxxxx>
> 
> Energy-aware load balancing bases on cpu usage so the upper bound of its
> operational range is a fully utilized cpu. Above this tipping point it
> makes more sense to use weighted_cpuload to preserve smp_nice.
> This patch implements the tipping point detection in update_sg_lb_stats
> as if one cpu is over-utilized the current energy-aware load balance
> operation will fall back into the conventional weighted load based one.
> 
> cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@xxxxxxx>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/fair.c | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 6b79603..4849bad 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -6723,6 +6723,10 @@ static inline void update_sg_lb_stats(struct lb_env *env,
>  		sgs->sum_weighted_load += weighted_cpuload(i);
>  		if (idle_cpu(i))
>  			sgs->idle_cpus++;
> +
> +		/* If cpu is over-utilized, bail out of ea */
> +		if (env->use_ea && cpu_overutilized(i, env->sd))
> +			env->use_ea = false;
>  	}

I don't immediately see why this is desired. Why would a single
overloaded CPU be reason to quit? It could be the cpus simply aren't
'balanced' right and the group as a whole is still under utilized.

In that case we want to continue the balance pass to reach this
equilibrium.
--
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/