lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Oct]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [tip: sched/core] sched: Add cluster scheduler level for x86
From
Date
On 10/15/21 4:44 AM, tip-bot2 for Tim Chen wrote:
> The following commit has been merged into the sched/core branch of tip:
>
> Commit-ID: 66558b730f2533cc2bf2b74d51f5f80b81e2bad0
> Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/66558b730f2533cc2bf2b74d51f5f80b81e2bad0
> Author: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
> AuthorDate: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 20:51:04 +12:00
> Committer: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> CommitterDate: Fri, 15 Oct 2021 11:25:16 +02:00
>
> sched: Add cluster scheduler level for x86
>
> There are x86 CPU architectures (e.g. Jacobsville) where L2 cahce is
> shared among a cluster of cores instead of being exclusive to one
> single core.
>
> To prevent oversubscription of L2 cache, load should be balanced
> between such L2 clusters, especially for tasks with no shared data.
> On benchmark such as SPECrate mcf test, this change provides a boost
> to performance especially on medium load system on Jacobsville. on a
> Jacobsville that has 24 Atom cores, arranged into 6 clusters of 4
> cores each, the benchmark number is as follow:
>
> Improvement over baseline kernel for mcf_r
> copies run time base rate
> 1 -0.1% -0.2%
> 6 25.1% 25.1%
> 12 18.8% 19.0%
> 24 0.3% 0.3%
>
> So this looks pretty good. In terms of the system's task distribution,
> some pretty bad clumping can be seen for the vanilla kernel without
> the L2 cluster domain for the 6 and 12 copies case. With the extra
> domain for cluster, the load does get evened out between the clusters.
>
> Note this patch isn't an universal win as spreading isn't necessarily
> a win, particually for those workload who can benefit from packing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Barry Song <song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210924085104.44806-4-21cnbao@gmail.com

I've bisected to this patch which now results in my EPYC systems issuing a
lot of:

[ 4.788480] BUG: arch topology borken
[ 4.789578] the SMT domain not a subset of the CLS domain

messages (one for each CPU in the system).

I haven't had a chance to dig deeper and understand everything, does
anyone have some quick insights/ideas?

Thanks,
Tom

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-10-20 15:13    [W:0.138 / U:0.120 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site