Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/2] sched/fair: Introduce short duration task check

From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Thu Nov 03 2022 - 08:45:05 EST


On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 11:32:31PM +0800, Chen Yu wrote:

> + if (sched_feat(SIS_SHORT) && !prev->on_rq) {
> + /*
> + * sum_exec_runtime has been updated in update_curr()
> + * because we reach here via dequeue.
> + */
> + this_dur_avg = se->sum_exec_runtime - se->prev_sum_runtime_vol;
> + /*
> + * Record the accumulated runtime when task voluntarily
> + * switches out. End of old duration period, a new period
> + * starts.
> + */
> + se->prev_sum_runtime_vol = se->sum_exec_runtime;
> +
> + last_dur_avg = se->dur_avg;
> + delta = this_dur_avg - last_dur_avg;
> + /* consider large change to avoid frequent update */
> + if (abs(delta) >= sysctl_sched_min_granularity) {
> + /*
> + * If it is the first time the task starts to
> + * record dur_avg, discard the initial value 0.
> + * Otherwise, calculate the EWMA.
> + */
> + if (unlikely(!this_dur_avg))
> + se->dur_avg = this_dur_avg;
> + else
> + update_avg(&se->dur_avg, this_dur_avg);
> + }
> + }

This seems excessively convoluted; what's wrong with something like:

if (sched_feat(SIS_SHORT) && !prev->on_rq) {
u64 this_dur = se->sum_exec_runtime - se->prev_sum_exec_runtime_vol;
se->prev_sum_exec_runtime_vol = se->sum_exec_runtime;

update_avg(&se->dur_avg, this_dur);
}

All that other stuff just makes it unreadable and probably slower.