Mainline: 183b8ec38f
From: v5.16-rc1
Category: Bugfix
CVE: NA
When scheduling, it is better to prefer a separate physical core rather
than the SMT sibling of a high priority core. The existing formula to
compute priorities takes such fact in consideration. There may exist,
however, combinations of priorities (i.e., maximum frequencies) in which
the priority of high-numbered SMT siblings of high-priority cores collides
with the priority of low-numbered SMT siblings of low-priority cores.
Consider for instance an SMT2 system with CPUs [0, 1] with priority 60 and
[2, 3] with priority 30(CPUs in brackets are SMT siblings. In such a case,
the resulting priorities would be [120, 60], [60, 30]. Thus, to ensure
that CPU2 has higher priority than CPU1, divide the raw priority by the
squared SMT iterator. The resulting priorities are [120, 30]. [60, 15].
Originally-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210911011819.12184-2-ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: chen zhang <chenzhang@kylinos.cn>
Change-Id: I9e570a403ad0a2e189ae8f01f0f78c02dfb6118e
Reviewed-on: http://gerrit.kylin.com/c/kfocal/+/33254
a1176e1a95