[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2 of 5 v3] xen: sched_credit: improve picking up the idle CPU for a VCPU
On 17/12/12 22:28, Dario Faggioli wrote:
In _csched_cpu_pick() we try to select the best possible CPU for
running a VCPU, considering the characteristics of the underlying
hardware (i.e., how many threads, core, sockets, and how busy they
are). What we want is "the idle execution vehicle with the most
idling neighbours in its grouping".
In order to achieve it, we select a CPU from the VCPU's affinity,
giving preference to its current processor if possible, as the basis
for the comparison with all the other CPUs. Problem is, to discount
the VCPU itself when computing this "idleness" (in an attempt to be
fair wrt its current processor), we arbitrarily and unconditionally
consider that selected CPU as idle, even when it is not the case,
for instance:
1. If the CPU is not the one where the VCPU is running (perhaps due
to the affinity being changed);
2. The CPU is where the VCPU is running, but it has other VCPUs in
its runq, so it won't go idle even if the VCPU in question goes.
This is exemplified in the trace below:
] 3.466115364 x|------|------| d10v1 22005(2:2:5) 3 [ a 1 8 ]
... ... ...
3.466122856 x|------|------| d10v1 runstate_change d10v1 running->offline
3.466123046 x|------|------| d?v? runstate_change d32767v0 runnable->running
... ... ...
] 3.466126887 x|------|------| d32767v0 28004(2:8:4) 3 [ a 1 8 ]
22005(...) line (the first line) means _csched_cpu_pick() was called on
VCPU 1 of domain 10, while it is running on CPU 0, and it choose CPU 8,
which is busy ('|'), even if there are plenty of idle CPUs. That is
because, as a consequence of changing the VCPU affinity, CPU 8 was
chosen as the basis for the comparison, and therefore considered idle
(its bit gets unconditionally set in the bitmask representing the idle
CPUs). 28004(...) line means the VCPU is woken up and queued on CPU 8's
runq, where it waits for a context switch or a migration, in order to
be able to execute.
This change fixes things by only considering the "guessed" CPU idle if
the VCPU in question is both running there and is its only runnable
VCPU.
Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@xxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Changes from v2:
* Use `vc->processor' instead of curr_on_cpu() for determining whether
or not vc is current on cpu, as suggested during review.
* Fixed IS_IDLE_RUNQ() macro in case runq is empty.
* Ditched the variable renaming, as requested during review.
diff --git a/xen/common/sched_credit.c b/xen/common/sched_credit.c
--- a/xen/common/sched_credit.c
+++ b/xen/common/sched_credit.c
@@ -59,6 +59,9 @@
#define CSCHED_VCPU(_vcpu) ((struct csched_vcpu *) (_vcpu)->sched_priv)
#define CSCHED_DOM(_dom) ((struct csched_dom *) (_dom)->sched_priv)
#define RUNQ(_cpu) (&(CSCHED_PCPU(_cpu)->runq))
+/* Is the first element of _cpu's runq its idle vcpu? */
+#define IS_RUNQ_IDLE(_cpu) (list_empty(RUNQ(_cpu)) || \
+ is_idle_vcpu(__runq_elem(RUNQ(_cpu)->next)->vcpu))
/*
@@ -478,9 +481,14 @@ static int
* distinct cores first and guarantees we don't do something stupid
* like run two VCPUs on co-hyperthreads while there are idle cores
* or sockets.
+ *
+ * Notice that, when computing the "idleness" of cpu, we may want to
+ * discount vc. That is, iff vc is the currently running and the only
+ * runnable vcpu on cpu, we add cpu to the idlers.
*/
cpumask_and(&idlers, &cpu_online_map, CSCHED_PRIV(ops)->idlers);
- cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &idlers);
+ if ( vc->processor == cpu && IS_RUNQ_IDLE(cpu) )
+ cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &idlers);
cpumask_and(&cpus, &cpus, &idlers);
cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, &cpus);
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
