linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched: Document Energy Aware Scheduling

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: <CAJZ5v0jw0BgmkwrtjuiC7YKO6A+k2eFfFDGtGsSWymW8PSTscA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 18 Jan 2019 10:57:08 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
Cc:     Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
        qais.yousef@....com, Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched: Document Energy Aware Scheduling

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 10:16 AM Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com> wrote:
>
> Hi Juri,
>
> On Thursday 17 Jan 2019 at 16:51:17 (+0100), Juri Lelli wrote:
> > On 10/01/19 11:05, Quentin Perret wrote:
> [...]
> > > +The idea behind introducing an EM is to allow the scheduler to evaluate the
> > > +implications of its decisions rather than blindly applying energy-saving
> > > +techniques that may have positive effects only on some platforms. At the same
> > > +time, the EM must be as simple as possible to minimize the scheduler latency
> > > +impact.
> > > +
> > > +In short, EAS changes the way CFS tasks are assigned to CPUs. When it is time
> >
> > Not sure if we want to remark the fact that EAS is looking at CFS tasks
> > only ATM.
>
> Oh, what's wrong about mentioning it ? I mean, it is a fact ATM ...

But it won't hurt to mention that it may cover other scheduling
classes in the future.  IOW, the scope limit is not fundamental.

> > > +for the scheduler to decide where a task should run (during wake-up), the EM
> > > +is used to break the tie between several good CPU candidates and pick the one
> > > +that is predicted to yield the best energy consumption without harming the
> > > +system's throughput. The predictions made by EAS rely on specific elements of
> > > +knowledge about the platform's topology, which include the 'capacity' of CPUs,
> >
> > Add a reference to DT bindings docs defining 'capacity' (or define it
> > somewhere)?
>
> Right, I can mention this is defined in the next section. But are you
> sure about the reference to the DT bindings ? They're arm-specific right ?
> Maybe I can give that as an example or something ...

Example sounds right.

You also can point to the section below from here.

Side note: If the doc is in the .rst format (which Peter won't like
I'm sure :-)), you can actually use cross-references in it and you get
a translation to an HTML doc (hosted at kernel.org) for free and the
cross-references become clickable links in that.