[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151215124144.GD6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:41:44 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@....com>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tn.it>
Subject: Re: [RFCv6 PATCH 09/10] sched: deadline: use deadline bandwidth in
scale_rt_capacity
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 05:43:44AM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On 14 December 2015 at 17:51, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > No, since the WCET can and _will_ happen, its the best you can do with
> > cpufreq. If you were to set it lower you could not be able to execute
> > correctly in your 'never' tail cases.
>
> In the context of frequency scaling, This mean that we will never
> reach low frequency
Only if you've stuffed your machine full of deadline tasks, if you take
Luca's example of the I/B frame decoder thingy, then even the WCET for
the I frames should not be very much (albeit significantly more than B
frames).
So while the WCET is pessimistic compared to the avg case, most CPUs can
do video decoding without much effort at all, so even the WCET for the
I-frames might allow us to drop to the lowest cpufreq.
Now, if you were to decode 10 streams at the same time, different story
of course ;-)
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists