On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 10:02 PM Aubrey Li <aubrey...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> AVX-512 components use could cause core turbo frequency drop. So
> it's useful to expose AVX-512 usage elapsed time as a heuristic hint
> for the user space job scheduler to cluster the AVX-512 using tasks
> together.
>
> Tensorflow example:
> $ while [ 1 ]; do cat /proc/pid/status | grep AVX; sleep 1; done
> AVX512_elapsed_ms: 4
> AVX512_elapsed_ms: 8
> AVX512_elapsed_ms: 4
>
> This means that 4 milliseconds have elapsed since the AVX512 usage
> of tensorflow task was detected when the task was scheduled out.
>
> Or:
> $ cat /proc/pid/status | grep AVX512_elapsed_ms
> AVX512_elapsed_ms: -1
(Very nitpicky, feel free to ignore: If you change the /proc/pid to
/proc/tid in the commit message, it becomes clearer that this status
is really per-task/thread, not per-process/threadgroup.)
[...]
> +
> +/*
> + * Report the amount of time elapsed in millisecond since last AVX512
> + * use in the task.
> + */
> +static void avx512_status(struct seq_file *m, struct task_struct *task)
> +{
> + unsigned long timestamp = task->thread.fpu.avx512_timestamp;
This is theoretically a data race, right? Should this have a READ_ONCE() on it?
Is there something that zeroes out the avx512_timestamp on
fork()/clone(), or will every child inherit the avx512 timestamp? As
far as I can tell, the timestamp is inherited; I think it would be
nicer to zero it out at that point. Either way, It might be worth
documenting this decision.
