Skip to content
Commit b39f0117 authored by Valentin Schneider's avatar Valentin Schneider Committed by Ionela Voinescu
Browse files

sched/fair: Tweak misfit-related capacity checks



During load-balance, groups classified as group_misfit_task are filtered
out if they do not pass

  group_smaller_max_cpu_capacity(<candidate group>, <local group>);

which itself employs fits_capacity() to compare the sgc->max_capacity of
both groups.

Due to the underlying margin, fits_capacity(X, 1024) will return false for
any X > 819. Tough luck, the capacity_orig's on e.g. the Pixel 4 are
{261, 871, 1024}. If a CPU-bound task ends up on one of those "medium"
CPUs, misfit migration will never intentionally upmigrate it to a CPU of
higher capacity due to the aforementioned margin.

One may argue the 20% margin of fits_capacity() is excessive in the advent
of counter-enhanced load tracking (APERF/MPERF, AMUs), but one point here
is that fits_capacity() is meant to compare a utilization value to a
capacity value, whereas here it is being used to compare two capacity
values. As CPU capacity and task utilization have different dynamics, a
sensible approach here would be to add a new helper dedicated to comparing
CPU capacities.

Introduce capacity_greater(), which uses a 5% margin. Use it to replace the
existing capacity checks. Note that check_cpu_capacity() uses yet another
margin (sd->imbalance_pct), and is left alone for now.

Signed-off-by: default avatarValentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
[ionela.voinescu@arm.com: fix conflict check_misfit_status]
parent e9d30eb4
Loading
Loading
Loading
Loading
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment