[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <60514763753f572f854f1bbf287c3c16fbbc12c3.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2023 18:45:20 -0800
From: srinivas pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Zhang, Rui" <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
"rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>,
"Neri, Ricardo" <ricardo.neri@...el.com>
Cc: "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"daniel.lezcano@...aro.org" <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] intel_powerclamp: New module parameter
Hi Rui,
On Sun, 2023-02-05 at 15:57 +0000, Zhang, Rui wrote:
> Hi, Srinivas,
>
> First of all, the previous build error is gone.
>
> Second, I found something strange, which may be related with the
> scheduler asym-packing, so CC Ricardo.
>
I thought you disable ITMT before idle injection and reenebale after
removal.
> The test is done with pm linux-intel branch + this patch series on an
> ADL system.
Can you do test on bleeding edge branch of Linux-pm?
> cpu0~cpu7 are Pcore cpus, cpu8-cpu15 are Ecore cpus, and
> intel_powerclamp is register as cooling_device21.
>
> 1. run stress -c 16
> 2. update /sys/module/intel_powerclamp/parameters/cpumask
> echo 90 > /sys/module/intel_powerclamp/parameters/max_idle
> 3. echo 90 > /sys/class/thermal/cooling_device21/cur_state
> 4. echo 0 > /sys/class/thermal/cooling_device21/cur_state
> I use turbostat to monitor the CPU Busy% in all 4 steps.
>
> If 'cpumask' does not include all the Ecore CPUs, all CPUs becomes
> 100%
> busy after idle injection removed in step 4.
>
that should be the case.
> If 'cpumask' includes all the Ecore CPUs, i.e. cpumask = FFxy, in
> some
> cases, the Ecore CPUs will drop to an Busy% much lower than 10%, and
> then they don't come back to busy after idle injection removed in
> step
Do you see that idle injection is removed message in dmesg?
We can also check powercap idle-inejct, if some CPUs still not wake
from play_idle.
> 4, although we have 16 stress threads. And this also relates with how
> long we stay in idle injection.
>
> Say, when cpumask=fff3, the problem can be triggered occasionally if
> there is a 10 second timeout between step 3 and step4, but it is much
> easier to reproducible if I increase the timeout to 20 seconds.
>
> It seems that Pcore can always pull tasks from Ecores, but Ecore can
> not pull tasks from Pcore HT siblings.
>
That will be regular load balance threads should do.
Better to try upsteam kernel first.
Thanks,
Srinivas
> thanks,
> rui
>
> On Sat, 2023-02-04 at 18:59 -0800, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> > Split from the series for powerclamp user of powercap idle-inject.
> >
> > v2
> > - Build warnings reported by Rui
> > - Moved the powerclamp documentation to admin guide folder
> > - Commit log updated as suggested by Rafael and other code
> > suggestion
> >
> > Srinivas Pandruvada (2):
> > Documentation:admin-guide: Move intel_powerclamp documentation
> > thermal/drivers/intel_powerclamp: Add two module parameters
> >
> > Documentation/admin-guide/index.rst | 1 +
> > .../thermal/intel_powerclamp.rst | 22 +++
> > Documentation/driver-api/thermal/index.rst | 1 -
> > MAINTAINERS | 1 +
> > drivers/thermal/intel/intel_powerclamp.c | 177
> > +++++++++++++++-
> > --
> > 5 files changed, 180 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> > rename Documentation/{driver-api => admin-
> > guide}/thermal/intel_powerclamp.rst (93%)
> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists