Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] sched/cpufreq: fix schedutil's boost frequency handling

[Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>]

On 08.09.26 10:30, Ananthu C V wrote:
> Schedutil's ability to reach boost frequencies depends on two values
> being correct: policy max, which caps the resolved target frequency,
> and the per-CPU capacity frequency reference, which anchors the
> utilization-to-frequency mapping.
> 
> This series fixes a few gaps in how these values are maintained across
> boost transitions:
> 
> The per-CPU capacity frequency reference is set once at policy
> creation and never updated when boost is enabled afterwards, leaving
> schedutil unable to target boost frequencies even at full utilization.
> Track the max available (boost inclusive) frequency before policy
> comes online and use it to seed the capacity_freq_ref value, allowing
> schedutil to utilize the boost frequency values when boost is enabled
> later.
> 
> The generic boost callback only raises cpuinfo max, never lowers it.
> Once boost is enabled, disabling it leaves cpuinfo max pinned at the
> boost ceiling, keeping policy max stuck there too. Also track the max
> available non-boost frequency and use the newly tracked max values to
> control boost frequencies when a frequency table is available, allowing
> the frequency to drop back to non boost values on boost disable. In
> the absense of a frequency table, the handling will fall back to using
> cpuinfo->max_freq, preserving the current behaviour.
> 
> Logs below for clear context:
> Intermediate values from the time_in_state output and logs from bench
> runs are truncated for brevity.
> 
> Before fix
> ----------
> 
> boost  policy0  policy12  policy6
> 
> 0
> 
> 4454400
> 
> 4723200
> 
> 4723200
> 
> 355200 36958
> 4454400 650
> 4588800 0
> 4723200 0
> 
> After fix
> ---------
> 
> boost  policy0  policy12  policy6
> 
> 0
> 
> 4454400
> 
> 4723200
> 
> 4454400
> 
> 0
> 
> 355200 40147
> 4454400 79
> 4588800 0
> 4723200 0
> 
> 355200 44834
> 4454400 93
> 4588800 25
> 4723200 569
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ananthu C V <ananthu.cv@oss.qualcomm.com>
> ---
> Ananthu C V (2):
>       arch_topology: seed capacity_freq_ref with boost-aware max freq
>       cpufreq: fix schedutil not returning to non-boost freq when boost is disabled
> 
>  drivers/base/arch_topology.c |  3 ++-
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c    | 14 +++++++++++++-
>  drivers/cpufreq/freq_table.c | 11 +++++++++++
>  include/linux/cpufreq.h      |  2 ++
>  4 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> ---
> base-commit: 32b6ef9a5d0eca44f9cd91f52f4faa89f145a0de
> change-id: 20260804-schedutil-boost-frequency-handling-8e6bf2387a4a
IMHO, this makes sense, also the coordination via cpufreq_pressure
(policy->max).

On ARM64 Juno R0:

# cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpu_capacity
446
1024
1024
446
446
446

# cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/boost
0

cat
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu{0,1}/cpufreq/scaling_{available,boost}_frequencies
450000 575000 700000
775000 850000
450000 625000 800000
950000 1100000

# cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu{0,1}/cpufreq/cpuinfo_{min,max}_freq
450000
700000
450000
800000

# dmsg | grep policy

[3.323564] cpufreq_update_pressure(): policy->related_cpus=[0,3-5]
policy->max=700000 pressure=102                                      (*)
[3.333206] cpufreq_update_pressure(): policy->related_cpus=[1-2]
policy->max=800000 pressure=280


# echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/boost

# dmsg | grep policy

[ 1511.188932] policy->related_cpus=[1-2] pressure=0
[ 1511.189050] policy->related_cpus=[0,3-5] pressure=0

# echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/boost

# dmsg | grep policy

[  204.951039] cpufreq_update_pressure(): policy->related_cpus=[1-2]
policy->max=800000 pressure=280
[  204.951223] cpufreq_update_pressure(): policy->related_cpus=[0,3-5]
policy->max=700000 pressure=79                                       (*)

(*) This is the only small issue I see. The pressure=102 is pressure
based on purely uarch differences (max_capacity(0,3-5)=578) whereas
pressure=79 later is based on uarch + max frequency differences
(max_capacity(0,3-5)=446).