linux-stable/include/linux/sched/sd_flags.h

167 lines
5.4 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
/*
* sched-domains (multiprocessor balancing) flag declarations.
*/
#ifndef SD_FLAG
# error "Incorrect import of SD flags definitions"
#endif
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
/*
* Hierarchical metaflags
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
*
* SHARED_CHILD: These flags are meant to be set from the base domain upwards.
* If a domain has this flag set, all of its children should have it set. This
* is usually because the flag describes some shared resource (all CPUs in that
* domain share the same resource), or because they are tied to a scheduling
* behaviour that we want to disable at some point in the hierarchy for
* scalability reasons.
*
* In those cases it doesn't make sense to have the flag set for a domain but
* not have it in (some of) its children: sched domains ALWAYS span their child
* domains, so operations done with parent domains will cover CPUs in the lower
* child domains.
*
*
* SHARED_PARENT: These flags are meant to be set from the highest domain
* downwards. If a domain has this flag set, all of its parents should have it
* set. This is usually for topology properties that start to appear above a
* certain level (e.g. domain starts spanning CPUs outside of the base CPU's
* socket).
*/
#define SDF_SHARED_CHILD 0x1
#define SDF_SHARED_PARENT 0x2
/*
* Behavioural metaflags
*
* NEEDS_GROUPS: These flags are only relevant if the domain they are set on has
* more than one group. This is usually for balancing flags (load balancing
* involves equalizing a metric between groups), or for flags describing some
* shared resource (which would be shared between groups).
*/
#define SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS 0x4
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
/*
* Balance when about to become idle
*
* SHARED_CHILD: Set from the base domain up to cpuset.sched_relax_domain_level.
* NEEDS_GROUPS: Load balancing flag.
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
*/
SD_FLAG(SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE, SDF_SHARED_CHILD | SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
/*
* Balance on exec
*
* SHARED_CHILD: Set from the base domain up to the NUMA reclaim level.
* NEEDS_GROUPS: Load balancing flag.
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
*/
SD_FLAG(SD_BALANCE_EXEC, SDF_SHARED_CHILD | SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
/*
* Balance on fork, clone
*
* SHARED_CHILD: Set from the base domain up to the NUMA reclaim level.
* NEEDS_GROUPS: Load balancing flag.
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
*/
SD_FLAG(SD_BALANCE_FORK, SDF_SHARED_CHILD | SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
/*
* Balance on wakeup
*
* SHARED_CHILD: Set from the base domain up to cpuset.sched_relax_domain_level.
* NEEDS_GROUPS: Load balancing flag.
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
*/
SD_FLAG(SD_BALANCE_WAKE, SDF_SHARED_CHILD | SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
/*
* Consider waking task on waking CPU.
*
* SHARED_CHILD: Set from the base domain up to the NUMA reclaim level.
*/
SD_FLAG(SD_WAKE_AFFINE, SDF_SHARED_CHILD)
/*
* Domain members have different CPU capacities
*
* SHARED_PARENT: Set from the topmost domain down to the first domain where
* asymmetry is detected.
* NEEDS_GROUPS: Per-CPU capacity is asymmetric between groups.
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
*/
SD_FLAG(SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, SDF_SHARED_PARENT | SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
/*
* Domain members have different CPU capacities spanning all unique CPU
* capacity values.
*
* SHARED_PARENT: Set from the topmost domain down to the first domain where
* all available CPU capacities are visible
* NEEDS_GROUPS: Per-CPU capacity is asymmetric between groups.
*/
SD_FLAG(SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY_FULL, SDF_SHARED_PARENT | SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
/*
* Domain members share CPU capacity (i.e. SMT)
*
* SHARED_CHILD: Set from the base domain up until spanned CPUs no longer share
* CPU capacity.
* NEEDS_GROUPS: Capacity is shared between groups.
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
*/
SD_FLAG(SD_SHARE_CPUCAPACITY, SDF_SHARED_CHILD | SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
/*
* Domain members share CPU package resources (i.e. caches)
*
* SHARED_CHILD: Set from the base domain up until spanned CPUs no longer share
* the same cache(s).
* NEEDS_GROUPS: Caches are shared between groups.
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
*/
SD_FLAG(SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES, SDF_SHARED_CHILD | SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
/*
* Only a single load balancing instance
*
* SHARED_PARENT: Set for all NUMA levels above NODE. Could be set from a
* different level upwards, but it doesn't change that if a
* domain has this flag set, then all of its parents need to have
* it too (otherwise the serialization doesn't make sense).
* NEEDS_GROUPS: No point in preserving domain if it has a single group.
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
*/
SD_FLAG(SD_SERIALIZE, SDF_SHARED_PARENT | SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
/*
* Place busy tasks earlier in the domain
*
* SHARED_CHILD: Usually set on the SMT level. Technically could be set further
* up, but currently assumed to be set from the base domain
* upwards (see update_top_cache_domain()).
* NEEDS_GROUPS: Load balancing flag.
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
*/
SD_FLAG(SD_ASYM_PACKING, SDF_SHARED_CHILD | SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
/*
* Prefer to place tasks in a sibling domain
*
* Set up until domains start spanning NUMA nodes. Close to being a SHARED_CHILD
* flag, but cleared below domains with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY.
*
* NEEDS_GROUPS: Load balancing flag.
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
*/
SD_FLAG(SD_PREFER_SIBLING, SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
/*
* sched_groups of this level overlap
*
* SHARED_PARENT: Set for all NUMA levels above NODE.
* NEEDS_GROUPS: Overlaps can only exist with more than one group.
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
*/
SD_FLAG(SD_OVERLAP, SDF_SHARED_PARENT | SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
/*
* Cross-node balancing
*
* SHARED_PARENT: Set for all NUMA levels above NODE.
* NEEDS_GROUPS: No point in preserving domain if it has a single group.
sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata There are some expectations regarding how sched domain flags should be laid out, but none of them are checked or asserted in sched_domain_debug_one(). After staring at said flags for a while, I've come to realize there's two repeating patterns: - Shared with children: those flags are set from the base CPU domain upwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its children. It hints at "some property holds true / some behaviour is enabled until this level". - Shared with parents: those flags are set from the topmost domain downwards. Any domain that has it set will have it set in its parents. It hints at "some property isn't visible / some behaviour is disabled until this level". There are two outliers that (currently) do not map to either of these: o SD_PREFER_SIBLING, which is cleared below levels with SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY. The change was introduced by commit: 9c63e84db29b ("sched/core: Disable SD_PREFER_SIBLING on asymmetric CPU capacity domains") as it could break misfit migration on some systems. In light of this, we might want to change it back to make it fit one of the two categories and fix the issue another way. o SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY, which gets set on a single level and isn't propagated up nor down. From a topology description point of view, it really wants to be SDF_SHARED_PARENT; this will be rectified in a later patch. Tweak the sched_domain flag declaration to assign each flag an expected layout, and include the rationale for each flag "meta type" assignment as a comment. Consolidate the flag metadata into an array; the index of a flag's metadata can easily be found with log2(flag), IOW __ffs(flag). Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200817113003.20802-5-valentin.schneider@arm.com
2020-08-17 11:29:50 +00:00
*/
SD_FLAG(SD_NUMA, SDF_SHARED_PARENT | SDF_NEEDS_GROUPS)