linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/8] cpufreq/schedutil: sum per-sched class utilization

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]

Date:	Wed, 16 Mar 2016 11:20:45 -0700
From:	Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>
Cc:	rjw@...ysocki.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, Juri.Lelli@....com,
	morten.rasmussen@....com, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
	vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette+renesas@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] cpufreq/schedutil: sum per-sched class utilization

On 03/16/2016 12:38 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Somewhere in the giant discussions I mentioned that we should be looking
> at a CPPC like interface and pass {min,max} tuples to the cpufreq
> selection thingy.
> 
> In that same discussion I also mentioned that we must compute min as the
> hard dl reservation, but that for max we can actually use the avg dl +
> avg rt + avg cfs.
> 
> That way there is far more room for selecting a sensible frequency.

Doesn't the above min/max policy mean that the platform will likely
underserve the task load? If avg dl+rt+cfs represents our best estimate
of the work to be done, I would think that should be the min.