aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorQuentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com>2018-12-03 04:56:27 -0500
committerIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>2018-12-11 09:17:02 -0500
commit732cd75b8c920d3727e69957b14faa7c2d7c3b75 (patch)
tree26910696a7b9890522b0fce093ea45188b5ff283
parent390031e4c309c94ecc07a558187eb5185200df83 (diff)
sched/fair: Select an energy-efficient CPU on task wake-up
If an Energy Model (EM) is available and if the system isn't overutilized, re-route waking tasks into an energy-aware placement algorithm. The selection of an energy-efficient CPU for a task is achieved by estimating the impact on system-level active energy resulting from the placement of the task on the CPU with the highest spare capacity in each performance domain. This strategy spreads tasks in a performance domain and avoids overly aggressive task packing. The best CPU energy-wise is then selected if it saves a large enough amount of energy with respect to prev_cpu. Although it has already shown significant benefits on some existing targets, this approach cannot scale to platforms with numerous CPUs. This is an attempt to do something useful as writing a fast heuristic that performs reasonably well on a broad spectrum of architectures isn't an easy task. As such, the scope of usability of the energy-aware wake-up path is restricted to systems with the SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY flag set, and where the EM isn't too complex. Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: adharmap@codeaurora.org Cc: chris.redpath@arm.com Cc: currojerez@riseup.net Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: edubezval@gmail.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: javi.merino@kernel.org Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: pkondeti@codeaurora.org Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: skannan@codeaurora.org Cc: smuckle@google.com Cc: srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com Cc: thara.gopinath@linaro.org Cc: tkjos@google.com Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181203095628.11858-15-quentin.perret@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
-rw-r--r--kernel/sched/fair.c143
1 files changed, 141 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index b3c94584d947..ca469646ebe1 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -6454,6 +6454,137 @@ compute_energy(struct task_struct *p, int dst_cpu, struct perf_domain *pd)
6454} 6454}
6455 6455
6456/* 6456/*
6457 * find_energy_efficient_cpu(): Find most energy-efficient target CPU for the
6458 * waking task. find_energy_efficient_cpu() looks for the CPU with maximum
6459 * spare capacity in each performance domain and uses it as a potential
6460 * candidate to execute the task. Then, it uses the Energy Model to figure
6461 * out which of the CPU candidates is the most energy-efficient.
6462 *
6463 * The rationale for this heuristic is as follows. In a performance domain,
6464 * all the most energy efficient CPU candidates (according to the Energy
6465 * Model) are those for which we'll request a low frequency. When there are
6466 * several CPUs for which the frequency request will be the same, we don't
6467 * have enough data to break the tie between them, because the Energy Model
6468 * only includes active power costs. With this model, if we assume that
6469 * frequency requests follow utilization (e.g. using schedutil), the CPU with
6470 * the maximum spare capacity in a performance domain is guaranteed to be among
6471 * the best candidates of the performance domain.
6472 *
6473 * In practice, it could be preferable from an energy standpoint to pack
6474 * small tasks on a CPU in order to let other CPUs go in deeper idle states,
6475 * but that could also hurt our chances to go cluster idle, and we have no
6476 * ways to tell with the current Energy Model if this is actually a good
6477 * idea or not. So, find_energy_efficient_cpu() basically favors
6478 * cluster-packing, and spreading inside a cluster. That should at least be
6479 * a good thing for latency, and this is consistent with the idea that most
6480 * of the energy savings of EAS come from the asymmetry of the system, and
6481 * not so much from breaking the tie between identical CPUs. That's also the
6482 * reason why EAS is enabled in the topology code only for systems where
6483 * SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY is set.
6484 *
6485 * NOTE: Forkees are not accepted in the energy-aware wake-up path because
6486 * they don't have any useful utilization data yet and it's not possible to
6487 * forecast their impact on energy consumption. Consequently, they will be
6488 * placed by find_idlest_cpu() on the least loaded CPU, which might turn out
6489 * to be energy-inefficient in some use-cases. The alternative would be to
6490 * bias new tasks towards specific types of CPUs first, or to try to infer
6491 * their util_avg from the parent task, but those heuristics could hurt
6492 * other use-cases too. So, until someone finds a better way to solve this,
6493 * let's keep things simple by re-using the existing slow path.
6494 */
6495
6496static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu)
6497{
6498 unsigned long prev_energy = ULONG_MAX, best_energy = ULONG_MAX;
6499 struct root_domain *rd = cpu_rq(smp_processor_id())->rd;
6500 int cpu, best_energy_cpu = prev_cpu;
6501 struct perf_domain *head, *pd;
6502 unsigned long cpu_cap, util;
6503 struct sched_domain *sd;
6504
6505 rcu_read_lock();
6506 pd = rcu_dereference(rd->pd);
6507 if (!pd || READ_ONCE(rd->overutilized))
6508 goto fail;
6509 head = pd;
6510
6511 /*
6512 * Energy-aware wake-up happens on the lowest sched_domain starting
6513 * from sd_asym_cpucapacity spanning over this_cpu and prev_cpu.
6514 */
6515 sd = rcu_dereference(*this_cpu_ptr(&sd_asym_cpucapacity));
6516 while (sd && !cpumask_test_cpu(prev_cpu, sched_domain_span(sd)))
6517 sd = sd->parent;
6518 if (!sd)
6519 goto fail;
6520
6521 sync_entity_load_avg(&p->se);
6522 if (!task_util_est(p))
6523 goto unlock;
6524
6525 for (; pd; pd = pd->next) {
6526 unsigned long cur_energy, spare_cap, max_spare_cap = 0;
6527 int max_spare_cap_cpu = -1;
6528
6529 for_each_cpu_and(cpu, perf_domain_span(pd), sched_domain_span(sd)) {
6530 if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &p->cpus_allowed))
6531 continue;
6532
6533 /* Skip CPUs that will be overutilized. */
6534 util = cpu_util_next(cpu, p, cpu);
6535 cpu_cap = capacity_of(cpu);
6536 if (cpu_cap * 1024 < util * capacity_margin)
6537 continue;
6538
6539 /* Always use prev_cpu as a candidate. */
6540 if (cpu == prev_cpu) {
6541 prev_energy = compute_energy(p, prev_cpu, head);
6542 best_energy = min(best_energy, prev_energy);
6543 continue;
6544 }
6545
6546 /*
6547 * Find the CPU with the maximum spare capacity in
6548 * the performance domain
6549 */
6550 spare_cap = cpu_cap - util;
6551 if (spare_cap > max_spare_cap) {
6552 max_spare_cap = spare_cap;
6553 max_spare_cap_cpu = cpu;
6554 }
6555 }
6556
6557 /* Evaluate the energy impact of using this CPU. */
6558 if (max_spare_cap_cpu >= 0) {
6559 cur_energy = compute_energy(p, max_spare_cap_cpu, head);
6560 if (cur_energy < best_energy) {
6561 best_energy = cur_energy;
6562 best_energy_cpu = max_spare_cap_cpu;
6563 }
6564 }
6565 }
6566unlock:
6567 rcu_read_unlock();
6568
6569 /*
6570 * Pick the best CPU if prev_cpu cannot be used, or if it saves at
6571 * least 6% of the energy used by prev_cpu.
6572 */
6573 if (prev_energy == ULONG_MAX)
6574 return best_energy_cpu;
6575
6576 if ((prev_energy - best_energy) > (prev_energy >> 4))
6577 return best_energy_cpu;
6578
6579 return prev_cpu;
6580
6581fail:
6582 rcu_read_unlock();
6583
6584 return -1;
6585}
6586
6587/*
6457 * select_task_rq_fair: Select target runqueue for the waking task in domains 6588 * select_task_rq_fair: Select target runqueue for the waking task in domains
6458 * that have the 'sd_flag' flag set. In practice, this is SD_BALANCE_WAKE, 6589 * that have the 'sd_flag' flag set. In practice, this is SD_BALANCE_WAKE,
6459 * SD_BALANCE_FORK, or SD_BALANCE_EXEC. 6590 * SD_BALANCE_FORK, or SD_BALANCE_EXEC.
@@ -6476,8 +6607,16 @@ select_task_rq_fair(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu, int sd_flag, int wake_f
6476 6607
6477 if (sd_flag & SD_BALANCE_WAKE) { 6608 if (sd_flag & SD_BALANCE_WAKE) {
6478 record_wakee(p); 6609 record_wakee(p);
6479 want_affine = !wake_wide(p) && !wake_cap(p, cpu, prev_cpu) 6610
6480 && cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &p->cpus_allowed); 6611 if (static_branch_unlikely(&sched_energy_present)) {
6612 new_cpu = find_energy_efficient_cpu(p, prev_cpu);
6613 if (new_cpu >= 0)
6614 return new_cpu;
6615 new_cpu = prev_cpu;
6616 }
6617
6618 want_affine = !wake_wide(p) && !wake_cap(p, cpu, prev_cpu) &&
6619 cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &p->cpus_allowed);
6481 } 6620 }
6482 6621
6483 rcu_read_lock(); 6622 rcu_read_lock();