mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@nxp.com>,
	Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Anson Huang <anson.huang@nxp.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] schedutil governor produces regular max freq spikes because of lockup detector watchdog threads
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2018 14:10:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7433376.gbrxC2yhp4@aspire.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180108040121.GB4003@vireshk-i7>

On Monday, January 8, 2018 5:01:21 AM CET Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 05-01-18, 23:18, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 9:37 PM, Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@nxp.com> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > When using the schedutil governor together with the softlockup detector
> > > all CPUs go to their maximum frequency on a regular basis. This seems
> > > to be because the watchdog creates a RT thread on each CPU and this
> > > causes regular kicks with:
> > >
> > >     cpufreq_update_this_cpu(rq, SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT);
> > >
> > > The schedutil governor responds to this by immediately setting the
> > > maximum cpu frequency, this is very undesirable.
> > >
> > > The issue can be fixed by this patch from android:
> > >     https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9301909/
> > >
> > > The patch stalled in a long discussion about how it's difficult for
> > > cpufreq to deal with RT and how some RT users might just disable
> > > cpufreq. It is indeed hard but if the system experiences regular power
> > > kicks from a common debug feature they will end up disabling schedutil
> > > instead.
> > 
> > They are basically free to use the other governors instead if they prefer them.
> > 
> > > No other governors behave this way,
> > 
> > Because they work differently overall.
> > 
> > > perhaps the current behavior should be considered a bug in schedutil.
> > >
> > > That patch now has conflicts with latest upstream. Perhaps a modified
> > > variant should be reconsidered for inclusion, or is there some other
> > > solution pending?
> > 
> > Patrick has a series of patches dealing with this problem area AFAICS,
> > but we are currently integrating material from Juri related to
> > deadline tasks.
> 
> I am not sure if Patrick's patches would solve this problem at all as
> we still go to max for RT and the RT task is created from the
> softlockup detector somehow.
> 
> One way to fix that can be to use DL for the softlockup detector as
> after Juri's patches we don't always go to max for DL.
> 
> On the other side, AFAIR, Peter was very clear during the previous LPC
> that it doesn't make sense to use rt-avg as the above patch suggests.

Right.

Why does the softlockup watchdog use RT tasks in the first place?

Thanks,
Rafael

  reply	other threads:[~2018-01-08 13:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-05 20:37 Leonard Crestez
2018-01-05 22:18 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-01-08  4:01   ` Viresh Kumar
2018-01-08 13:10     ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2018-01-08 13:20     ` Leonard Crestez
2018-01-08 15:14       ` Patrick Bellasi
2018-01-08 15:51         ` Leonard Crestez
2018-01-09  1:17           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-01-09 14:43             ` Leonard Crestez
2018-01-09 15:16               ` Lucas Stach
2018-01-09 15:50               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-01-10 10:54                 ` Juri Lelli
2018-01-10 12:35                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-01-10 14:21                     ` Juri Lelli
2018-01-11  1:20                       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-01-10  4:08               ` Viresh Kumar
2018-01-06 16:12 Doug Smythies

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=7433376.gbrxC2yhp4@aspire.rjw.lan \
    --to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=anson.huang@nxp.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=leonard.crestez@nxp.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=patrick.bellasi@arm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --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®