[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d4dc6630-041f-bf61-898a-6f402b993fbc@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 20:17:41 +0200
From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
To: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@....com>
Cc: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...hat.com, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, corbet@....net, rdunlap@...radead.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] sched/topology: Rework CPU capacity asymmetry
detection
On 26/05/2021 14:51, Beata Michalska wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 01:15:46PM +0100, Beata Michalska wrote:
>> On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 11:52:25AM +0200, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
>>> On 25/05/2021 12:29, Beata Michalska wrote:
>>>> On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 10:53:07AM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote:
>>>>> On 24/05/21 23:55, Beata Michalska wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 07:01:04PM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote:
>>>>>>> On 24/05/21 11:16, Beata Michalska wrote:
[...]
>>> BTW, how would this mechanism behave on a system with SMT and asymmetric CPU
>>> capacity? Something EAS wouldn't allow but I guess asym_cap_list will be
>>> constructed and the SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY_XXX flags will be set?
>> Yes, the list would get created and flags set. I do not think there is
>> a difference with current approach (?). So EAS would be disabled (it only cares
>> about SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY_FULL flag) but the misift might still kick in.
>>
> That depends on the arch_scale_cpu_capacity. I would imagine it would
> return SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE for those, which means no asymmetry will
> be detected ?
I was thinking about an erroneous dts file like:
cpu-map {
cluster0 {
core0 {
thread0 {
cpu = <&A53_0>;
};
thread1 {
cpu = <&A53_1>;
};
};
core1 {
thread0 {
cpu = <&A53_2>;
};
thread1 {
cpu = <&A53_3>;
};
};
core2 {
thread0 {
cpu = <&A53_4>;
};
thread1 {
cpu = <&A53_5>;
};
};
};
cluster1 {
core0 {
thread0 {
cpu = <&A53_6>;
};
thread1 {
cpu = <&A53_7>;
};
};
};
};
A53_0: cpu@0 {
capacity-dmips-mhz = <446>;
A53_1: cpu@1 {
capacity-dmips-mhz = <1024>;
A53_2: cpu@2 {
capacity-dmips-mhz = <871>;
A53_3: cpu@3 {
capacity-dmips-mhz = <1024>;
A53_4: cpu@4 {
capacity-dmips-mhz = <446>;
A53_5: cpu@5 {
capacity-dmips-mhz = <871>;
A53_6: cpu@6 {
capacity-dmips-mhz = <1024>;
A53_7: cpu@7 {
capacity-dmips-mhz = <1024>;
Here I guess SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY will be attached to SMT[0-5]. So this
'capacity-dmips-mhz' config error won't be detected.
In case all CPUs (i.e. hw threads would have the correct
capacity-dmips-mhz = <1024> or not being set (default 1024))
asym_cap_list would corrcetly only have 1 entry.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists