[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAH9NwWfQfejtup6hHi68gE_VJs2RkL=298NURELqt3kVfc_AVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 10:44:47 +0200
From: Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@...il.com>
To: Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Chris Healy <cphealy@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux+etnaviv@...linux.org.uk>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
The etnaviv authors <etnaviv@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
DRI mailing list <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add support for GPU load values
Hoi Lucas
Am Fr., 10. Juli 2020 um 10:31 Uhr schrieb Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>:
>
> Hi Christian,
>
> Am Freitag, den 10.07.2020, 09:41 +0200 schrieb Christian Gmeiner:
> > This patch series add support for loadavg values for GPU
> > sub-components. I am adding a SMA algorithm as I was not
> > really sure if EWMA would be a good fit for this use case.
>
> 1 second is a pretty long window in GPU time. Why do you feel that a
> simple moving average is more appropriate than a exponentially
> weighted one here? Note that I haven't given this any thought myself
> and haven't made up my mind yet, so this is a honest question to
> understand the reasoning behind your choice.
>
I played with both variants but I 'feel' that SMA might be a better
fit. To be honest I
have no background in signal processing and stuff like this so.. I
will go the route you
guide me to :) I have kept the "interface" for SMA equal to the one EWMA uses
so I can easily switch between them.
--
greets
--
Christian Gmeiner, MSc
https://christian-gmeiner.info/privacypolicy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists