mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
To: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com,
	cristian.marussi@arm.com, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org,
	rafael@kernel.org, viresh.kumar@linaro.org,
	quic_sibis@quicinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] PM: EM: Add min/max available performance state limits
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 09:46:03 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <823cbe86-1615-4c68-9995-ef3565c9e42b@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240403162315.1458337-2-lukasz.luba@arm.com>

On 03/04/2024 18:23, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> On some devices there are HW dependencies for shared frequency and voltage
> between devices: CPUs and L3 cache. When the L3 cache frequency is
> increased, the affected CPUs might run at higher voltage and frequency.

IMHO, this is an example where the min Performance State (PS) makes
sense. But what's a use case for the max PS?

> That higher voltage causes higher CPU power and thus more energy is used
> for running the tasks.
> 
> Add performance state limits which are applied for the device. This allows

Regarding device, I thought that this is only applicable for device type
CPU?

> the Energy Model (EM) to better reflect the CPU's currently available
> performance states. This information is used by Energy Aware Scheduler
> (EAS) during task placement to avoid situation when a simulated energy
> cost has error due to using wrong Power Domain (PD) frequency.

Maybe better?

This is important on SoCs with HW dependencies mentioned above so that
the  Energy Aware Scheduler (EAS) does not use performance states
outside the valid min-max range for energy calculation.

> The function performs only bare minimum checks (and requires EM as

s/The function/em_update_performance_limits()

s/EM/PD ... I guess we always pass a PD pointer to all the EM functions.
I guess we can say that an EM consists of at least 2 PDs.
I guess it's valid to say that we limit per PD, e.g. per little CPUs?

[...]

>  /**
>   * em_pd_get_efficient_state() - Get an efficient performance state from the EM
> @@ -189,12 +195,13 @@ int em_dev_update_chip_binning(struct device *dev);
>   */

Missing  min_ps, max_ps description in function header of
em_pd_get_efficient_state().

[...]

> +/**
> + * em_update_performance_limits() - Update Energy Model with performance
> + *				limits information.
> + * @pd			: Performance Domain with EM that has to be updated.
> + * @freq_min_khz	: New minimum allowed frequency for this device.
> + * @freq_max_khz	: New maximum allowed frequency for this device.
> + *
> + * This function allows to update the EM with information about available
> + * performance levels. It takes the minimum and maximum frequency in kHz
> + * and does internal translation to performance levels.
> + * Returns 0 on success or -EINVAL when failed.
> + */
> +int em_update_performance_limits(struct em_perf_domain *pd,
> +		unsigned long freq_min_khz, unsigned long freq_max_khz)
> +{
> +	struct em_perf_state *table;
> +	int min_ps = -1;
> +	int max_ps = -1;
> +	int i;
> +
> +	if (!pd)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	rcu_read_lock();
> +	table = em_perf_state_from_pd(pd);
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < pd->nr_perf_states; i++) {
> +		if (freq_min_khz == table[i].frequency)

So the caller has to know the exact frequency value of the performance
states (PSs)? It's not 'f(PS_n-1) + 1 <= x <= f(PS_n)'.

[...]


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-04-22  7:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-04-03 16:23 [PATCH 0/2] Update Energy Model with perfromance limits Lukasz Luba
2024-04-03 16:23 ` [PATCH 1/2] PM: EM: Add min/max available performance state limits Lukasz Luba
2024-04-09 14:47   ` Hongyan Xia
2024-04-22  7:24     ` Lukasz Luba
2024-04-22  7:46   ` Dietmar Eggemann [this message]
2024-04-03 16:23 ` [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: scmi: Update Energy Model with allowed performance limits Lukasz Luba
2024-04-22 13:11   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2024-04-22 13:55     ` Lukasz Luba
2024-05-01  9:26   ` Cristian Marussi
2024-04-05  9:56 ` [PATCH 0/2] Update Energy Model with perfromance limits Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-05 10:11   ` Lukasz Luba

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=823cbe86-1615-4c68-9995-ef3565c9e42b@arm.com \
    --to=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=cristian.marussi@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lukasz.luba@arm.com \
    --cc=quic_sibis@quicinc.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --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®