[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YwzOf5WV5G8dQBGb@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 16:34:39 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@...gle.com>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@...bug.net>,
Abhijeet Dharmapurikar <adharmap@...cinc.com>,
Jian-Min <Jian-Min.Liu@...iatek.com>,
Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] sched/pelt: Introduce PELT multiplier
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 02:23:17PM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:
> I'll let folks in CC comment about their use-case in more details, but
> there's definitely been an interest in tuning this thing at run-time
An interest and it making sense are two very distinct things that bear
no relation to one another in any way.
> FWIW. Typically a larger half-life will be fine with predictable
> workloads with little inputs from users (e.g. fullscreen video playback)
> while a lower one can be preferred in highly interactive cases (games,
As per always; consider the combined workload.
> ...). The transient state is fun to reason about, but it really
> shouldn't be too common AFAIK.
Once you give away control there is no taking it back, and userspace
*will* do stupid things and expect unicorns.
> With that said I'd quite like to see numbers to back that claim.
> Measuring power while running a video (for instance) with various HL
> values should help. And similarly it shouldn't be too hard to get
> performance numbers.
I'm thinking this all needs far more than mere numbers to justify.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists