sched/fair: Use a recently used CPU as an idle candidate and the basis for SIS
The select_idle_sibling() (SIS) rewrite in commit: 10e2f1ac ("sched/core: Rewrite and improve select_idle_siblings()") ... replaced a domain iteration with a search that broadly speaking does a wrapped walk of the scheduler domain sharing a last-level-cache. While this had a number of improvements, one consequence is that two tasks that share a waker/wakee relationship push each other around a socket. Even though two tasks may be active, all cores are evenly used. This is great from a search perspective and spreads a load across individual cores, but it has adverse consequences for cpufreq. As each CPU has relatively low utilisation, cpufreq may decide the utilisation is too low to used a higher P-state and overall computation throughput suffers. While individual cpufreq and cpuidle drivers may compensate by artifically boosting P-state (at c0) or avoiding lower C-states (during idle), it does not help if hardware-based cpufreq (e.g. HWP) is used. This patch tracks a recently used CPU based on what CPU a task was running on when it last was a waker a CPU it was recently using when a task is a wakee. During SIS, the recently used CPU is used as a target if it's still allowed by the task and is idle. The benefit may be non-obvious so consider an example of two tasks communicating back and forth. Task A may be an application doing IO where task B is a kworker or kthread like journald. Task A may issue IO, wake B and B wakes up A on completion. With the existing scheme this may look like the following (potentially different IDs if SMT is in use but similar principal applies). A (cpu 0) wake B (wakes on cpu 1) B (cpu 1) wake A (wakes on cpu 2) A (cpu 2) wake B (wakes on cpu 3) etc. A careful reader may wonder why CPU 0 was not idle when B wakes A the first time and it's simply due to the fact that A can be rescheduled to another CPU and the pattern is that prev == target when B tries to wakeup A and the information about CPU 0 has been lost. With this patch, the pattern is more likely to be: A (cpu 0) wake B (wakes on cpu 1) B (cpu 1) wake A (wakes on cpu 0) A (cpu 0) wake B (wakes on cpu 1) etc i.e. two communicating casts are more likely to use just two cores instead of all available cores sharing a LLC. The most dramatic speedup was noticed on dbench using the XFS filesystem on UMA as clients interact heavily with workqueues in that configuration. Note that a similar speedup is not observed on ext4 as the wakeup pattern is different: 4.15.0-rc9 4.15.0-rc9 waprev-v1 biasancestor-v1 Hmean 1 287.54 ( 0.00%) 817.01 ( 184.14%) Hmean 2 1268.12 ( 0.00%) 1781.24 ( 40.46%) Hmean 4 1739.68 ( 0.00%) 1594.47 ( -8.35%) Hmean 8 2464.12 ( 0.00%) 2479.56 ( 0.63%) Hmean 64 1455.57 ( 0.00%) 1434.68 ( -1.44%) The results can be less dramatic on NUMA where automatic balancing interferes with the test. It's also known that network benchmarks running on localhost also benefit quite a bit from this patch (roughly 10% on netperf RR for UDP and TCP depending on the machine). Hackbench also seens small improvements (6-11% depending on machine and thread count). The facebook schbench was also tested but in most cases showed little or no different to wakeup latencies. Signed-off-by: NMel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180130104555.4125-5-mgorman@techsingularity.netSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Showing
想要评论请 注册 或 登录