From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
Andres Oportus <andresoportus@google.com>,
Todd Kjos <tkjos@android.com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] cpufreq: schedutil: fixes for flags updates
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 00:26:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1922385.Uty99Stho4@aspire.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1499189651-18797-1-git-send-email-patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
On Tuesday, July 04, 2017 06:34:05 PM Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> Each time a CPU utilisation update is issued by the scheduler a flag, which
> mainly defines which scheduling class is asking for the update, is used by the
> frequency selection policy to support the selection of the most appropriate
> OPP.
>
> In the current implementation, CPU flags are overridden each time the scheduler
> calls schedutil for an update. Such a behavior seems to be sub-optimal,
> especially on systems where frequency domains span across multiple CPUs.
>
> Indeed, assuming CPU1 and CPU2 share the same frequency domain, there can be
> the following issues:
>
> A) Small FAIR task running at MAX OPP.
> A RT task, which just executed on CPU1, can keep the domain at the
> max frequency for a prolonged period of time after its completion,
> even if there are no longer RT tasks running on CPUs of its domain.
>
> B) FAIR wakeup reducing the OPP of the current RT task.
> A FAIR task enqueued in a CPU where a RT task is running overrides the flag
> configured by the RT task thus potentially causing an unwanted frequency
> drop.
>
> C) RT wakeup not running at max OPP.
> An RT task waking up on a CPU which has recently updated its OPP can
> be forced to run at a lower frequency because of the throttling
> enforced by schedutil, even if there are not OPP transitions
> currently in progress.
>
> .:: Patches organization
> ========================
>
> This series proposes a set of fixes for the aforementioned issues and it's an
> update addressing all the main comments collected from the previous posting
> [1].
It seems to me that there is a nonzero overlap between this and the Juri's work.
If that's correct, I'd like this series to go on top of the Juri's one.
Thanks,
Rafael
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-06 22:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-04 17:34 Patrick Bellasi
2017-07-04 17:34 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] cpufreq: schedutil: ignore sugov kthreads Patrick Bellasi
2017-07-05 5:00 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-07-05 11:38 ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-07-06 4:50 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-07-06 22:18 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-07-11 19:08 ` Saravana Kannan
2017-07-04 17:34 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] cpufreq: schedutil: reset sg_cpus's flags at IDLE enter Patrick Bellasi
2017-07-05 4:50 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-07-05 13:04 ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-07-06 5:46 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-07-07 4:43 ` Joel Fernandes
2017-07-07 10:17 ` Juri Lelli
2017-07-11 19:16 ` Saravana Kannan
2017-07-04 17:34 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] cpufreq: schedutil: ensure max frequency while running RT/DL tasks Patrick Bellasi
2017-07-05 6:01 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-07-05 13:41 ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-07-06 5:56 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-07-07 5:26 ` Joel Fernandes
2017-07-04 17:34 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] cpufreq: schedutil: update CFS util only if used Patrick Bellasi
2017-07-07 5:58 ` Joel Fernandes
2017-07-07 6:44 ` Vikram Mulukutla
2017-07-08 6:14 ` Joel Fernandes
2017-07-10 17:49 ` Vikram Mulukutla
2017-07-11 5:19 ` Joel Fernandes
2017-07-04 17:34 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] sched/rt: fast switch to maximum frequency when RT tasks are scheduled Patrick Bellasi
2017-07-04 17:34 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] cpufreq: schedutil: relax rate-limiting while running RT/DL tasks Patrick Bellasi
2017-07-06 22:26 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
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=1922385.Uty99Stho4@aspire.rjw.lan \
--to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=andresoportus@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=joelaf@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=patrick.bellasi@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=tkjos@android.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/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®