Could you check this patchset considering cpu topology on cpu selection?
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:00:55AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > When cpudl_find() returns any among free_cpus, the cpu might not be > closer than others, considering sched domain. For example: > > this_cpu: 15 > free_cpus: 0, 1,..., 14 (== later_mask) > best_cpu: 0 > > topology: > > 0 --+ > +--+ > 1 --+ | > +-- ... --+ > 2 --+ | | > +--+ | > 3 --+ | > > ... ... > > 12 --+ | > +--+ | > 13 --+ | | > +-- ... -+ > 14 --+ | > +--+ > 15 --+ > > In this case, it would be best to select 14 since it's a free cpu and > closest to 15(this_cpu). However, currently the code select 0(best_cpu) > even though that's just any among free_cpus. Fix it. > > Change from v4 > -. remove a patch that might cause huge lock contention > (by spin lock(&cpudl.lock) in a hot path of scheduler) > > Change from v3 > -. rename closest_cpu to best_cpu so that it align with rt > -. protect referring cpudl.elements with cpudl.lock > -. change return value of cpudl_find() to bool > > Change from v2 > -. add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING > > Change from v1 > -. clean up the patch > > Byungchul Park (4): > sched/deadline: Make find_later_rq() choose a closer cpu in topology > sched/deadline: Change return value of cpudl_find() > sched/deadline: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_later_rq() > sched/rt: Add support for SD_PREFER_SIBLING on find_lowest_rq() > > kernel/sched/cpudeadline.c | 26 ++++++++++++------------- > kernel/sched/deadline.c | 48 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- > kernel/sched/rt.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) > > -- > 1.9.1
