[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1922385.Uty99Stho4@aspire.rjw.lan>
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 00:26:18 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
Andres Oportus <andresoportus@...gle.com>,
Todd Kjos <tkjos@...roid.com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] cpufreq: schedutil: fixes for flags updates
On Tuesday, July 04, 2017 06:34:05 PM Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> Each time a CPU utilisation update is issued by the scheduler a flag, which
> mainly defines which scheduling class is asking for the update, is used by the
> frequency selection policy to support the selection of the most appropriate
> OPP.
>
> In the current implementation, CPU flags are overridden each time the scheduler
> calls schedutil for an update. Such a behavior seems to be sub-optimal,
> especially on systems where frequency domains span across multiple CPUs.
>
> Indeed, assuming CPU1 and CPU2 share the same frequency domain, there can be
> the following issues:
>
> A) Small FAIR task running at MAX OPP.
> A RT task, which just executed on CPU1, can keep the domain at the
> max frequency for a prolonged period of time after its completion,
> even if there are no longer RT tasks running on CPUs of its domain.
>
> B) FAIR wakeup reducing the OPP of the current RT task.
> A FAIR task enqueued in a CPU where a RT task is running overrides the flag
> configured by the RT task thus potentially causing an unwanted frequency
> drop.
>
> C) RT wakeup not running at max OPP.
> An RT task waking up on a CPU which has recently updated its OPP can
> be forced to run at a lower frequency because of the throttling
> enforced by schedutil, even if there are not OPP transitions
> currently in progress.
>
> .:: Patches organization
> ========================
>
> This series proposes a set of fixes for the aforementioned issues and it's an
> update addressing all the main comments collected from the previous posting
> [1].
It seems to me that there is a nonzero overlap between this and the Juri's work.
If that's correct, I'd like this series to go on top of the Juri's one.
Thanks,
Rafael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists