Re: [PATCH] sched: rt: Make RT capacity aware

From: Qais Yousef
Date: Mon Sep 23 2019 - 07:52:29 EST


On 09/20/19 14:52, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> > 2. The fallback mechanism means we either have to call cpupri_find()
> > twice once to find filtered lowest_rq and the other to return the
> > none filtered version.
>
> This is what I have in mind. (Only compile tested! ... and the 'if
> (cpumask_any(lowest_mask) >= nr_cpu_ids)' condition has to be considered
> as well):
>
> @@ -98,8 +103,26 @@ int cpupri_find(struct cpupri *cp, struct
> task_struct *p,
> continue;
>
> if (lowest_mask) {
> + int cpu, max_cap_cpu = -1;
> + unsigned long max_cap = 0;
> +
> cpumask_and(lowest_mask, p->cpus_ptr, vec->mask);
>
> + for_each_cpu(cpu, lowest_mask) {
> + unsigned long cap =
> arch_scale_cpu_capacity(cpu);
> +
> + if (!rt_task_fits_capacity(p, cpu))
> + cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, lowest_mask);
> +
> + if (cap > max_cap) {
> + max_cap = cap;
> + max_cap_cpu = cpu;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if (cpumask_empty(lowest_mask) && max_cap)
> + cpumask_set_cpu(max_cap_cpu, lowest_mask);

I had a patch that I was testing but what I did is to continue rather than
return a max_cap_cpu.

e.g:

if no cpu at current priority fits the task:
continue;
else:
return the lowest_mask which contains fitting cpus only

if no fitting cpu was find:
return 0;


Or we can tweak your approach to be

if no cpu at current priority fits the task:
if the cpu the task is currently running on doesn't fit it:
return lowest_mask with max_cap_cpu set;

So we either:

1. Continue the search until we find a fitting CPU; bail out otherwise.

2. Or we attempt to return a CPU only if the CPU the task is currently
running on doesn't fit it. We don't want to migrate the task from a
fitting to a non-fitting one.

We can also do something hybrid like:

3. Remember the outcome of 2 but don't return immediately and attempt
to find a fitting CPU at a different priority level.


Personally I see 1 is the simplest and good enough solution. What do you think?

I think this is 'continue' to search makes doing it at cpupri_find() more
robust than having to deal with whatever mask we first found in
find_lowest_rq() - so I'm starting to like this approach better. Thanks for
bringing it up.


Cheers

--
Qais Yousef