[PATCH] sched_ext: introduce LLC awareness to the default idle selection policy

Andrea Righi posted 1 patch 1 month ago
kernel/sched/ext.c | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 60 insertions(+)
[PATCH] sched_ext: introduce LLC awareness to the default idle selection policy
Posted by Andrea Righi 1 month ago
Rely on the scheduler topology information to implement basic LLC
awareness in the sched_ext build-in idle selection policy.

This allows schedulers using the built-in policy to make more informed
decisions when selecting an idle CPU in systems with multiple LLCs, such
as NUMA systems or chiplet-based architectures, and it helps keep tasks
within the same LLC domain, thereby improving cache locality.

Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
---
 kernel/sched/ext.c | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/ext.c b/kernel/sched/ext.c
index a13a6461a290..a301c4d7d49f 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/ext.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/ext.c
@@ -874,6 +874,14 @@ static struct scx_exit_info *scx_exit_info;
 static atomic_long_t scx_nr_rejected = ATOMIC_LONG_INIT(0);
 static atomic_long_t scx_hotplug_seq = ATOMIC_LONG_INIT(0);
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+/*
+ * Per-CPU cpumasks used by the built-in idle CPU selection policy to determine
+ * task's LLC domain.
+ */
+static DEFINE_PER_CPU(cpumask_var_t, select_cpu_mask);
+#endif /* CONFIG_SMP */
+
 /*
  * A monotically increasing sequence number that is incremented every time a
  * scheduler is enabled. This can be used by to check if any custom sched_ext
@@ -3122,6 +3130,8 @@ static s32 scx_pick_idle_cpu(const struct cpumask *cpus_allowed, u64 flags)
 static s32 scx_select_cpu_dfl(struct task_struct *p, s32 prev_cpu,
 			      u64 wake_flags, bool *found)
 {
+	struct cpumask *llc_cpus = this_cpu_cpumask_var_ptr(select_cpu_mask);
+	struct sched_domain *sd;
 	s32 cpu;
 
 	*found = false;
@@ -3168,27 +3178,62 @@ static s32 scx_select_cpu_dfl(struct task_struct *p, s32 prev_cpu,
 		}
 	}
 
+	/*
+	 * Determine the task's LLC domain.
+	 */
+	sd = rcu_dereference(per_cpu(sd_llc, prev_cpu));
+	if (sd)
+		cpumask_and(llc_cpus, sched_domain_span(sd), p->cpus_ptr);
+	else
+		cpumask_copy(llc_cpus, p->cpus_ptr);
+
 	/*
 	 * If CPU has SMT, any wholly idle CPU is likely a better pick than
 	 * partially idle @prev_cpu.
 	 */
 	if (sched_smt_active()) {
+		/*
+		 * Keep using @prev_cpu if it's part of a fully idle core.
+		 */
 		if (cpumask_test_cpu(prev_cpu, idle_masks.smt) &&
 		    test_and_clear_cpu_idle(prev_cpu)) {
 			cpu = prev_cpu;
 			goto cpu_found;
 		}
 
+		/*
+		 * Search for any fully idle core in the same LLC domain.
+		 */
+		cpu = scx_pick_idle_cpu(llc_cpus, SCX_PICK_IDLE_CORE);
+		if (cpu >= 0)
+			goto cpu_found;
+
+		/*
+		 * Search for any full idle core usable by the task.
+		 */
 		cpu = scx_pick_idle_cpu(p->cpus_ptr, SCX_PICK_IDLE_CORE);
 		if (cpu >= 0)
 			goto cpu_found;
 	}
 
+	/*
+	 * Use @prev_cpu if it's idle.
+	 */
 	if (test_and_clear_cpu_idle(prev_cpu)) {
 		cpu = prev_cpu;
 		goto cpu_found;
 	}
 
+	/*
+	 * Search for any idle CPU in the same LLC domain.
+	 */
+	cpu = scx_pick_idle_cpu(llc_cpus, 0);
+	if (cpu >= 0)
+		goto cpu_found;
+
+	/*
+	 * Search for any idle CPU usable by the task.
+	 */
 	cpu = scx_pick_idle_cpu(p->cpus_ptr, 0);
 	if (cpu >= 0)
 		goto cpu_found;
@@ -7189,6 +7234,19 @@ static const struct btf_kfunc_id_set scx_kfunc_set_any = {
 	.set			= &scx_kfunc_ids_any,
 };
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+static void init_select_cpu_mask(void)
+{
+	int i;
+
+	for_each_possible_cpu(i)
+		zalloc_cpumask_var_node(&per_cpu(select_cpu_mask, i),
+					GFP_KERNEL, cpu_to_node(i));
+}
+#else
+static inline void init_select_cpu_mask(void) {}
+#endif /* CONFIG_SMP */
+
 static int __init scx_init(void)
 {
 	int ret;
@@ -7250,6 +7308,8 @@ static int __init scx_init(void)
 		return ret;
 	}
 
+	init_select_cpu_mask();
+
 	return 0;
 }
 __initcall(scx_init);
-- 
2.47.0
Re: [PATCH] sched_ext: introduce LLC awareness to the default idle selection policy
Posted by Tejun Heo 1 month ago
Hello,

Overall, I think this is a great idea. 

On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 09:13:04AM +0200, Andrea Righi wrote:
...
> +	/*
> +	 * Determine the task's LLC domain.
> +	 */
> +	sd = rcu_dereference(per_cpu(sd_llc, prev_cpu));
> +	if (sd)
> +		cpumask_and(llc_cpus, sched_domain_span(sd), p->cpus_ptr);
> +	else
> +		cpumask_copy(llc_cpus, p->cpus_ptr);

However, I wonder whether we can be a bit more efficient here. Always
copying cpumasks can become noticeable in larger machines. It should be
possible to cover most common cases without copying cpumasks - e.g. tasks
which don't have any cpumask restrictions or affine within a single LLC
(including tasks restricted to one CPU) don't need to compute a new cpumask
each time. They can use either sched_domain_span() or p->cpus_ptr directly.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
Re: [PATCH] sched_ext: introduce LLC awareness to the default idle selection policy
Posted by Andrea Righi 1 month ago
On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 10:01:27AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Overall, I think this is a great idea.
> 
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 09:13:04AM +0200, Andrea Righi wrote:
> ...
> > +     /*
> > +      * Determine the task's LLC domain.
> > +      */
> > +     sd = rcu_dereference(per_cpu(sd_llc, prev_cpu));
> > +     if (sd)
> > +             cpumask_and(llc_cpus, sched_domain_span(sd), p->cpus_ptr);
> > +     else
> > +             cpumask_copy(llc_cpus, p->cpus_ptr);
> 
> However, I wonder whether we can be a bit more efficient here. Always
> copying cpumasks can become noticeable in larger machines. It should be
> possible to cover most common cases without copying cpumasks - e.g. tasks
> which don't have any cpumask restrictions or affine within a single LLC
> (including tasks restricted to one CPU) don't need to compute a new cpumask
> each time. They can use either sched_domain_span() or p->cpus_ptr directly.

I agree, I was also thinking to improve this part to avoid doing the
copy. And I have a few other changes to apply, I'll send a v2 soon.

Thanks!
-Andrea

> 
> Thanks.
> 
> --
> tejun