Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched/rt: cpupri_find: implement fallback mechanism for !fit case

[Dietmar Eggemann]

On 18/02/2020 00:45, Qais Yousef wrote:
> On 02/17/20 20:09, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
>> On 14/02/2020 17:39, Qais Yousef wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>  /**
>>>   * cpupri_find - find the best (lowest-pri) CPU in the system
>>>   * @cp: The cpupri context
>>> @@ -62,80 +115,72 @@ int cpupri_find(struct cpupri *cp, struct task_struct *p,
>>>  		struct cpumask *lowest_mask,
>>>  		bool (*fitness_fn)(struct task_struct *p, int cpu))
>>>  {
>>> -	int idx = 0;
>>>  	int task_pri = convert_prio(p->prio);
>>> +	int best_unfit_idx = -1;
>>> +	int idx = 0, cpu;
>>>  
>>>  	BUG_ON(task_pri >= CPUPRI_NR_PRIORITIES);
>>>  
>>>  	for (idx = 0; idx < task_pri; idx++) {
>>> -		struct cpupri_vec *vec  = &cp->pri_to_cpu[idx];
>>> -		int skip = 0;
>>>  
>>> -		if (!atomic_read(&(vec)->count))
>>> -			skip = 1;
>>> -		/*
>>> -		 * When looking at the vector, we need to read the counter,
>>> -		 * do a memory barrier, then read the mask.
>>> -		 *
>>> -		 * Note: This is still all racey, but we can deal with it.
>>> -		 *  Ideally, we only want to look at masks that are set.
>>> -		 *
>>> -		 *  If a mask is not set, then the only thing wrong is that we
>>> -		 *  did a little more work than necessary.
>>> -		 *
>>> -		 *  If we read a zero count but the mask is set, because of the
>>> -		 *  memory barriers, that can only happen when the highest prio
>>> -		 *  task for a run queue has left the run queue, in which case,
>>> -		 *  it will be followed by a pull. If the task we are processing
>>> -		 *  fails to find a proper place to go, that pull request will
>>> -		 *  pull this task if the run queue is running at a lower
>>> -		 *  priority.
>>> -		 */
>>> -		smp_rmb();
>>> -
>>> -		/* Need to do the rmb for every iteration */
>>> -		if (skip)
>>> -			continue;
>>> -
>>> -		if (cpumask_any_and(p->cpus_ptr, vec->mask) >= nr_cpu_ids)
>>> +		if (!__cpupri_find(cp, p, lowest_mask, idx))
>>>  			continue;
>>>  
>>> -		if (lowest_mask) {
>>> -			int cpu;
>>
>> Shouldn't we add an extra condition here?
>>
>> +               if (!static_branch_unlikely(&sched_asym_cpucapacity))
>> +                       return 1;
>> +
>>
>> Otherwise non-heterogeneous systems have to got through this
>> for_each_cpu(cpu, lowest_mask) further below for no good reason.
> 
> Hmm below is the best solution I can think of at the moment. Works for you?
> 
> It's independent of what this patch tries to fix, so I'll add as a separate
> patch to the series in the next update.

OK.

Since we can't set it as early as init_sched_rt_class()

root@juno:~# dmesg | grep "\*\*\*"
[    0.501697] *** set sched_asym_cpucapacity <-- CPU cap asym by uArch
[    0.505847] *** init_sched_rt_class()
[    1.796706] *** set sched_asym_cpucapacity <-- CPUfreq kicked in

we probably have to do it either by bailing out of cpupri_find() early
with this extra condition (above) or by initializing the func pointer
dynamically (your example).

[...]

> @@ -1708,6 +1710,7 @@ static int find_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task)
>         struct cpumask *lowest_mask = this_cpu_cpumask_var_ptr(local_cpu_mask);
>         int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
>         int cpu      = task_cpu(task);
> +       fitness_fn_t fitness_fn;
> 
>         /* Make sure the mask is initialized first */
>         if (unlikely(!lowest_mask))
> @@ -1716,8 +1719,17 @@ static int find_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task)
>         if (task->nr_cpus_allowed == 1)
>                 return -1; /* No other targets possible */
> 
> +       /*
> +        * Help cpupri_find avoid the cost of looking for a fitting CPU when
> +        * not really needed.
> +        */

In case the commend is really needed, for me it would work better
logically inverse.

[...]