linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: governor: Be friendly towards latency-sensitive bursty workloads

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAKohpomEX8+WN2pVdUZwFsSE4JgnFuUuHTu0WcDmLy71JxWGOA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 3 Jun 2014 15:46:10 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: governor: Be friendly towards latency-sensitive
 bursty workloads

On 3 June 2014 15:43, Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
> index e1c6433..2597bbe 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
> @@ -36,14 +36,29 @@ void dbs_check_cpu(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, int cpu)
>         struct od_dbs_tuners *od_tuners = dbs_data->tuners;
>         struct cs_dbs_tuners *cs_tuners = dbs_data->tuners;
>         struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> +       unsigned int sampling_rate;
>         unsigned int max_load = 0;
>         unsigned int ignore_nice;
>         unsigned int j;
>
> -       if (dbs_data->cdata->governor == GOV_ONDEMAND)
> +       if (dbs_data->cdata->governor == GOV_ONDEMAND) {
> +               struct od_cpu_dbs_info_s *od_dbs_info =
> +                               dbs_data->cdata->get_cpu_dbs_info_s(cpu);
> +
> +               /*
> +                * Sometimes, the ondemand governor uses an additional
> +                * multiplier to give long delays. So apply this multiplier to
> +                * the 'sampling_rate', so as to keep the wake-up-from-idle
> +                * detection logic a bit conservative.
> +                */
> +               sampling_rate = od_tuners->sampling_rate;
> +               sampling_rate *= od_dbs_info->rate_mult;
> +
>                 ignore_nice = od_tuners->ignore_nice_load;
> -       else
> +       } else {
> +               sampling_rate = cs_tuners->sampling_rate;
>                 ignore_nice = cs_tuners->ignore_nice_load;
> +       }
>
>         policy = cdbs->cur_policy;
>
> @@ -96,7 +111,29 @@ void dbs_check_cpu(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, int cpu)
>                 if (unlikely(!wall_time || wall_time < idle_time))
>                         continue;
>
> -               load = 100 * (wall_time - idle_time) / wall_time;
> +               /*
> +                * If the CPU had gone completely idle, and a task just woke up
> +                * on this CPU now, it would be unfair to calculate 'load' the
> +                * usual way for this elapsed time-window, because it will show
> +                * near-zero load, irrespective of how CPU intensive the new
> +                * task is. This is undesirable for latency-sensitive bursty
> +                * workloads.
> +                *
> +                * To avoid this, we reuse the 'load' from the previous
> +                * time-window and give this task a chance to start with a
> +                * reasonably high CPU frequency.
> +                *
> +                * Detecting this situation is easy: the governor's deferrable
> +                * timer would not have fired during CPU-idle periods. Hence
> +                * an unusually large 'wall_time' (as compared to the sampling
> +                * rate) indicates this scenario.
> +                */
> +               if (unlikely(wall_time > (2 * sampling_rate))) {
> +                       load = j_cdbs->prev_load;
> +               } else {
> +                       load = 100 * (wall_time - idle_time) / wall_time;
> +                       j_cdbs->prev_load = load;
> +               }
>
>                 if (load > max_load)
>                         max_load = load;
> @@ -323,6 +360,10 @@ int cpufreq_governor_dbs(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
>                         j_cdbs->cur_policy = policy;
>                         j_cdbs->prev_cpu_idle = get_cpu_idle_time(j,
>                                                &j_cdbs->prev_cpu_wall, io_busy);
> +                       j_cdbs->prev_load = 100 * (j_cdbs->prev_cpu_wall -
> +                                                  j_cdbs->prev_cpu_idle) /
> +                                                  j_cdbs->prev_cpu_wall;
> +
>                         if (ignore_nice)
>                                 j_cdbs->prev_cpu_nice =
>                                         kcpustat_cpu(j).cpustat[CPUTIME_NICE];
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h
> index bfb9ae1..b56552b 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h
> @@ -134,6 +134,7 @@ struct cpu_dbs_common_info {
>         u64 prev_cpu_idle;
>         u64 prev_cpu_wall;
>         u64 prev_cpu_nice;
> +       unsigned int prev_load;
>         struct cpufreq_policy *cur_policy;
>         struct delayed_work work;
>         /*

Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/