On 19/09/2019 08:33, Vincent Guittot wrote:

[...]

> @@ -8283,69 +8363,133 @@ static inline void update_sd_lb_stats(struct lb_env 
> *env, struct sd_lb_stats *sd
>   */
>  static inline void calculate_imbalance(struct lb_env *env, struct 
> sd_lb_stats *sds)
>  {
> -     unsigned long max_pull, load_above_capacity = ~0UL;
>       struct sg_lb_stats *local, *busiest;
>  
>       local = &sds->local_stat;
>       busiest = &sds->busiest_stat;
>  
> -     if (busiest->group_asym_packing) {
> +     if (busiest->group_type == group_misfit_task) {
> +             /* Set imbalance to allow misfit task to be balanced. */
> +             env->balance_type = migrate_misfit;
> +             env->imbalance = busiest->group_misfit_task_load;
> +             return;
> +     }
> +
> +     if (busiest->group_type == group_asym_packing) {
> +             /*
> +              * In case of asym capacity, we will try to migrate all load to
> +              * the preferred CPU.
> +              */
> +             env->balance_type = migrate_load;
>               env->imbalance = busiest->group_load;
>               return;
>       }
>  
> +     if (busiest->group_type == group_imbalanced) {
> +             /*
> +              * In the group_imb case we cannot rely on group-wide averages
> +              * to ensure CPU-load equilibrium, try to move any task to fix
> +              * the imbalance. The next load balance will take care of
> +              * balancing back the system.
> +              */
> +             env->balance_type = migrate_task;
> +             env->imbalance = 1;
> +             return;
> +     }
> +
>       /*
> -      * Avg load of busiest sg can be less and avg load of local sg can
> -      * be greater than avg load across all sgs of sd because avg load
> -      * factors in sg capacity and sgs with smaller group_type are
> -      * skipped when updating the busiest sg:
> +      * Try to use spare capacity of local group without overloading it or
> +      * emptying busiest
>        */
> -     if (busiest->group_type != group_misfit_task &&
> -         (busiest->avg_load <= sds->avg_load ||
> -          local->avg_load >= sds->avg_load)) {
> -             env->imbalance = 0;
> +     if (local->group_type == group_has_spare) {
> +             if (busiest->group_type > group_fully_busy) {
> +                     /*
> +                      * If busiest is overloaded, try to fill spare
> +                      * capacity. This might end up creating spare capacity
> +                      * in busiest or busiest still being overloaded but
> +                      * there is no simple way to directly compute the
> +                      * amount of load to migrate in order to balance the
> +                      * system.
> +                      */
> +                     env->balance_type = migrate_util;
> +                     env->imbalance = max(local->group_capacity, 
> local->group_util) -
> +                                 local->group_util;
> +                     return;
> +             }
> +
> +             if (busiest->group_weight == 1 || sds->prefer_sibling) {
> +                     /*
> +                      * When prefer sibling, evenly spread running tasks on
> +                      * groups.
> +                      */
> +                     env->balance_type = migrate_task;
> +                     env->imbalance = (busiest->sum_h_nr_running - 
> local->sum_h_nr_running) >> 1;

Isn't that one somewhat risky?

Say both groups are classified group_has_spare and we do prefer_sibling.
We'd select busiest as the one with the maximum number of busy CPUs, but it
could be so that busiest.sum_h_nr_running < local.sum_h_nr_running (because
pinned tasks or wakeup failed to properly spread stuff).

The thing should be unsigned so at least we save ourselves from right
shifting a negative value, but we still end up with a gygornous imbalance
(which we then store into env.imbalance which *is* signed... Urgh).

[...]

Reply via email to