linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v4 03/12] PM: Introduce an Energy Model management framework

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:   Fri, 6 Jul 2018 11:05:20 +0100
From:   Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
To:     Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:THERMAL" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
        Chris Redpath <chris.redpath@....com>,
        Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
        Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
        Thara Gopinath <thara.gopinath@...aro.org>,
        viresh kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@...gle.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        "Cc: Steve Muckle" <smuckle@...gle.com>, adharmap@...cinc.com,
        "Kannan, Saravana" <skannan@...cinc.com>, pkondeti@...eaurora.org,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        currojerez@...eup.net, Javi Merino <javi.merino@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 03/12] PM: Introduce an Energy Model management
 framework

Hi Vincent,

On Friday 06 Jul 2018 at 11:57:37 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 at 13:41, Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com> wrote:
> > +static inline unsigned long em_fd_energy(struct em_freq_domain *fd,
> > +                               unsigned long max_util, unsigned long sum_util)
> > +{
> > +       struct em_cs_table *cs_table;
> > +       struct em_cap_state *cs;
> > +       unsigned long freq;
> > +       int i;
> > +
> > +       cs_table = rcu_dereference(fd->cs_table);
> > +       if (!cs_table)
> > +               return 0;
> > +
> > +       /* Map the utilization value to a frequency */
> > +       cs = &cs_table->state[cs_table->nr_cap_states - 1];
> > +       freq = map_util_freq(max_util, cs->frequency, cs->capacity);
> 
> The 2 lines above deserve more explanation:
> 1st, you get the max capacity of the freq domain
> Then, you estimate what will be the selected frequency according to
> the max_utilization.
> Might worth to mention that we must keep sync how sched_util and EM
> select a freq for a given capacity which is the reason of patch 02

Agreed, this could benefit from more explanations. I'll comment that
better in the next version.

> 
> > +
> > +       /* Find the lowest capacity state above this frequency */
> > +       for (i = 0; i < cs_table->nr_cap_states; i++) {
> > +               cs = &cs_table->state[i];
> > +               if (cs->frequency >= freq)
> > +                       break;
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       return cs->power * sum_util / cs->capacity;
> 
> IIUC the formula above, you consider that all CPUs in a frequency
> domain has the same capacity. This sounds a reasonable assumption but
> it would be good to write that somewhere

That's correct, we agreed on the assumption that CPUs in the same freq
domain must have the same micro-arch, and consequently the same capacity.

But you're right, that needs at the very least to be documented. Or even
better, I should check that when the EM is created and bail out with an
error message if that's not the case. That shouldn't be too hard to
implement, I think.

Thanks,
Quentin