sched/core: Use load_avg for selecting idlest group

find_idlest_group() only compares the runnable_load_avg when looking
for the least loaded group. But on fork intensive use case like
hackbench where tasks blocked quickly after the fork, this can lead to
selecting the same CPU instead of other CPUs, which have similar
runnable load but a lower load_avg.

When the runnable_load_avg of 2 CPUs are close, we now take into
account the amount of blocked load as a 2nd selection factor. There is
now 3 zones for the runnable_load of the rq:

 - [0 .. (runnable_load - imbalance)]:
	Select the new rq which has significantly less runnable_load

 - [(runnable_load - imbalance) .. (runnable_load + imbalance)]:
	The runnable loads are close so we use load_avg to chose
	between the 2 rq

 - [(runnable_load + imbalance) .. ULONG_MAX]:
	Keep the current rq which has significantly less runnable_load

The scale factor that is currently used for comparing runnable_load,
doesn't work well with small value. As an example, the use of a
scaling factor fails as soon as this_runnable_load == 0 because we
always select local rq even if min_runnable_load is only 1, which
doesn't really make sense because they are just the same. So instead
of scaling factor, we use an absolute margin for runnable_load to
detect CPUs with similar runnable_load and we keep using scaling
factor for blocked load.

For use case like hackbench, this enable the scheduler to select
different CPUs during the fork sequence and to spread tasks across the
system.

Tests have been done on a Hikey board (ARM based octo cores) for
several kernel. The result below gives min, max, avg and stdev values
of 18 runs with each configuration.

The patches depend on the "no missing update_rq_clock()" work.

hackbench -P -g 1

         ea86cb4b  7dc603c9  v4.8        v4.8+patches
  min    0.049         0.050         0.051       0,048
  avg    0.057         0.057(0%)     0.057(0%)   0,055(+5%)
  max    0.066         0.068         0.070       0,063
  stdev  +/-9%         +/-9%         +/-8%       +/-9%

More performance numbers here:

  https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161203214707.GI20785@codeblueprint.co.uk



Tested-by: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com
Cc: kernellwp@gmail.com
Cc: umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com
Cc: yuyang.du@intel.comc
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1481216215-24651-3-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org


Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>