Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
sched/numa: Slow down scan rate if shared faults dominate
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
The comment above update_task_scan_period() says the scan period should
be increased (scanning slows down) if the majority of memory accesses
are on the local node, or if the majority of the page accesses are
shared with other tasks.

However, with the current code, all a high ratio of shared accesses
does is slow down the rate at which scanning is made faster.

This patch changes things so either lots of shared accesses or
lots of local accesses will slow down scanning, and numa scanning
is sped up only when there are lots of private faults on remote
memory pages.

Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: jhladky@redhat.com
Cc: lvenanci@redhat.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170731192847.23050-2-riel@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
  • Loading branch information
Rik van Riel authored and Ingo Molnar committed Aug 10, 2017
1 parent f235a54 commit 37ec97d
Showing 1 changed file with 25 additions and 14 deletions.
39 changes: 25 additions & 14 deletions kernel/sched/fair.c
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1892,7 +1892,7 @@ static void update_task_scan_period(struct task_struct *p,
unsigned long shared, unsigned long private)
{
unsigned int period_slot;
int ratio;
int lr_ratio, ps_ratio;
int diff;

unsigned long remote = p->numa_faults_locality[0];
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -1922,25 +1922,36 @@ static void update_task_scan_period(struct task_struct *p,
* >= NUMA_PERIOD_THRESHOLD scan period increases (scan slower)
*/
period_slot = DIV_ROUND_UP(p->numa_scan_period, NUMA_PERIOD_SLOTS);
ratio = (local * NUMA_PERIOD_SLOTS) / (local + remote);
if (ratio >= NUMA_PERIOD_THRESHOLD) {
int slot = ratio - NUMA_PERIOD_THRESHOLD;
lr_ratio = (local * NUMA_PERIOD_SLOTS) / (local + remote);
ps_ratio = (private * NUMA_PERIOD_SLOTS) / (private + shared);

if (ps_ratio >= NUMA_PERIOD_THRESHOLD) {
/*
* Most memory accesses are local. There is no need to
* do fast NUMA scanning, since memory is already local.
*/
int slot = ps_ratio - NUMA_PERIOD_THRESHOLD;
if (!slot)
slot = 1;
diff = slot * period_slot;
} else if (lr_ratio >= NUMA_PERIOD_THRESHOLD) {
/*
* Most memory accesses are shared with other tasks.
* There is no point in continuing fast NUMA scanning,
* since other tasks may just move the memory elsewhere.
*/
int slot = lr_ratio - NUMA_PERIOD_THRESHOLD;
if (!slot)
slot = 1;
diff = slot * period_slot;
} else {
diff = -(NUMA_PERIOD_THRESHOLD - ratio) * period_slot;

/*
* Scale scan rate increases based on sharing. There is an
* inverse relationship between the degree of sharing and
* the adjustment made to the scanning period. Broadly
* speaking the intent is that there is little point
* scanning faster if shared accesses dominate as it may
* simply bounce migrations uselessly
* Private memory faults exceed (SLOTS-THRESHOLD)/SLOTS,
* yet they are not on the local NUMA node. Speed up
* NUMA scanning to get the memory moved over.
*/
ratio = DIV_ROUND_UP(private * NUMA_PERIOD_SLOTS, (private + shared + 1));
diff = (diff * ratio) / NUMA_PERIOD_SLOTS;
int ratio = max(lr_ratio, ps_ratio);
diff = -(NUMA_PERIOD_THRESHOLD - ratio) * period_slot;
}

p->numa_scan_period = clamp(p->numa_scan_period + diff,
Expand Down

0 comments on commit 37ec97d

Please sign in to comment.