RE: [PATCH] sched/fair: don't use waker's cpu if the waker of sync wake-up is interrupt

[Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Galbraith [mailto:efault@xxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2021 5:55 PM
> To: Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) <song.bao.hua@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> vincent.guittot@xxxxxxxxxx; mingo@xxxxxxxxxx; peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> dietmar.eggemann@xxxxxxx; rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx; bsegall@xxxxxxxxxx;
> mgorman@xxxxxxx
> Cc: valentin.schneider@xxxxxxx; juri.lelli@xxxxxxxxxx; bristot@xxxxxxxxxx;
> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; xuwei (O)
> <xuwei5@xxxxxxxxxx>; Zengtao (B) <prime.zeng@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> guodong.xu@xxxxxxxxxx; yangyicong <yangyicong@xxxxxxxxxx>; Liguozhu (Kenneth)
> <liguozhu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linuxarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; wanghuiqiang
> <wanghuiqiang@xxxxxxxxxx>; xieyongjia (A) <xieyongjia1@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: don't use waker's cpu if the waker of sync
> wake-up is interrupt
> 
> On Tue, 2021-04-27 at 04:44 +0000, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote:
> >
> >
> > I agree sync hint might have been overused by other kernel subsystem.
> > But this patch will at least fix a case: sync waker is interrupt,
> > in this case, the existing task has nothing to do with waker and wakee,
> > so this case should be excluded from wake_affine_idle().
> 
> I long ago tried filtering interrupt wakeups, and met some surprises.
> Wakeup twiddling always managing to end up being a rob Peter to pay
> Paul operation despite our best efforts, here's hoping that your pile
> of stolen cycles is small enough to escape performance bot notice :)

Would you like to share the link you did before to filter interrupt
wakeups?

The wake up path has hundreds of lines of code, so I don't expect that
reading preempt_count will cause visible performance losses to bot. But
who knows :-)

> 
> 	-Mike

Thanks
Barry