From: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, rafael@kernel.org, viresh.kumar@linaro.org
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, void@manifault.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org,
David Vernet <dvernet@meta.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq_schedutil: Refactor sugov_cpu_is_busy()
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:07:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0c0073ef-3fe3-4c9f-9a86-5c42336b3da1@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240619031250.2936087-2-tj@kernel.org>
On 6/19/24 04:12, Tejun Heo wrote:
> sugov_cpu_is_busy() is used to avoid decreasing performance level while the
> CPU is busy and called by sugov_update_single_freq() and
> sugov_update_single_perf(). Both callers repeat the same pattern to first
> test for uclamp and then the business. Let's refactor so that the tests
> aren't repeated.
>
> The new helper is named sugov_hold_freq() and tests both the uclamp
> exception and CPU business. No functional changes. This will make adding
> more exception conditions easier.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
> Reviewed-by: David Vernet <dvernet@meta.com>
> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> ---
> kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 38 +++++++++++++++-----------------
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> index eece6244f9d2..972b7dd65af2 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> @@ -325,16 +325,27 @@ static unsigned long sugov_iowait_apply(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu, u64 time,
> }
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON
> -static bool sugov_cpu_is_busy(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu)
> +static bool sugov_hold_freq(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu)
> {
> - unsigned long idle_calls = tick_nohz_get_idle_calls_cpu(sg_cpu->cpu);
> - bool ret = idle_calls == sg_cpu->saved_idle_calls;
> + unsigned long idle_calls;
> + bool ret;
> +
> + /* if capped by uclamp_max, always update to be in compliance */
> + if (uclamp_rq_is_capped(cpu_rq(sg_cpu->cpu)))
> + return false;
> +
> + /*
> + * Maintain the frequency if the CPU has not been idle recently, as
> + * reduction is likely to be premature.
> + */
> + idle_calls = tick_nohz_get_idle_calls_cpu(sg_cpu->cpu);
> + ret = idle_calls == sg_cpu->saved_idle_calls;
>
> sg_cpu->saved_idle_calls = idle_calls;
> return ret;
> }
> #else
> -static inline bool sugov_cpu_is_busy(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu) { return false; }
> +static inline bool sugov_hold_freq(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu) { return false; }
> #endif /* CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON */
>
> /*
> @@ -382,14 +393,8 @@ static void sugov_update_single_freq(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time,
> return;
>
> next_f = get_next_freq(sg_policy, sg_cpu->util, max_cap);
> - /*
> - * Do not reduce the frequency if the CPU has not been idle
> - * recently, as the reduction is likely to be premature then.
> - *
> - * Except when the rq is capped by uclamp_max.
> - */
> - if (!uclamp_rq_is_capped(cpu_rq(sg_cpu->cpu)) &&
> - sugov_cpu_is_busy(sg_cpu) && next_f < sg_policy->next_freq &&
> +
> + if (sugov_hold_freq(sg_cpu) && next_f < sg_policy->next_freq &&
> !sg_policy->need_freq_update) {
> next_f = sg_policy->next_freq;
>
Not necessarily related to your changes, but in case you're touching this
again, maybe sugov_hold_freq() could be the last condition?
And do we want something like
#ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON
else
sg_cpu->saved_idle_calls = tick_nohz_get_idle_calls_cpu(sg_cpu->cpu);
#endif
here?
> @@ -436,14 +441,7 @@ static void sugov_update_single_perf(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time,
> if (!sugov_update_single_common(sg_cpu, time, max_cap, flags))
> return;
>
> - /*
> - * Do not reduce the target performance level if the CPU has not been
> - * idle recently, as the reduction is likely to be premature then.
> - *
> - * Except when the rq is capped by uclamp_max.
> - */
> - if (!uclamp_rq_is_capped(cpu_rq(sg_cpu->cpu)) &&
> - sugov_cpu_is_busy(sg_cpu) && sg_cpu->util < prev_util)
> + if (sugov_hold_freq(sg_cpu) && sg_cpu->util < prev_util)
> sg_cpu->util = prev_util;
>
> cpufreq_driver_adjust_perf(sg_cpu->cpu, sg_cpu->bw_min,
FWIW
Reviewed-by: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-19 14:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-19 3:12 [PATCHSET sched_ext/for-6.11] sched_ext: Integrate with schedutil Tejun Heo
2024-06-19 3:12 ` [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq_schedutil: Refactor sugov_cpu_is_busy() Tejun Heo
2024-06-19 14:07 ` Christian Loehle [this message]
2024-06-19 18:57 ` Tejun Heo
2024-06-19 19:07 ` Tejun Heo
2024-06-20 9:40 ` Christian Loehle
2024-06-19 18:45 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-06-19 19:53 ` Tejun Heo
2024-06-20 17:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-06-20 18:08 ` Tejun Heo
2024-06-21 22:38 ` Tejun Heo
2024-06-19 3:12 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched_ext: Add cpuperf support Tejun Heo
2024-06-19 14:07 ` Christian Loehle
2024-06-19 19:19 ` Tejun Heo
2024-06-19 19:51 ` [PATCH v2 " Tejun Heo
2024-06-21 22:39 ` Tejun Heo
2024-07-05 12:41 ` Vincent Guittot
2024-07-05 18:22 ` Tejun Heo
2024-07-06 9:01 ` Vincent Guittot
2024-07-07 1:44 ` Tejun Heo
2024-07-08 6:37 ` Vincent Guittot
2024-07-08 18:20 ` Tejun Heo
2024-07-08 19:51 ` Vincent Guittot
2024-07-08 21:08 ` Tejun Heo
2024-07-09 13:36 ` Vincent Guittot
2024-07-09 16:43 ` Tejun Heo
2024-07-12 10:12 ` Vincent Guittot
2024-07-12 17:10 ` Tejun Heo
2024-07-02 10:23 ` [PATCH " Hongyan Xia
2024-07-02 16:37 ` Tejun Heo
2024-07-02 17:12 ` Hongyan Xia
2024-07-02 17:56 ` Tejun Heo
2024-07-02 20:41 ` Hongyan Xia
2024-07-02 21:12 ` Tejun Heo
2024-07-24 23:45 ` Qais Yousef
2024-07-31 1:05 ` Tejun Heo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=0c0073ef-3fe3-4c9f-9a86-5c42336b3da1@arm.com \
--to=christian.loehle@arm.com \
--cc=dvernet@meta.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=void@manifault.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®