linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 12/18] PM: EM: Use runtime modified EM for CPUs energy estimation in EAS

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]

Date:   Fri, 29 Sep 2023 11:10:08 +0100
From:   Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        dietmar.eggemann@....com, rui.zhang@...el.com,
        amit.kucheria@...durent.com, amit.kachhap@...il.com,
        daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
        len.brown@...el.com, pavel@....cz, mhiramat@...nel.org,
        qyousef@...alina.io, wvw@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 12/18] PM: EM: Use runtime modified EM for CPUs energy
 estimation in EAS



On 9/26/23 20:54, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 10:11 AM Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com> wrote:
>>
>> The new Energy Model (EM) supports runtime modification of the performance
>> state table to better model the power used by the SoC. Use this new
>> feature to improve energy estimation and therefore task placement in
>> Energy Aware Scheduler (EAS).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
>> ---
>>   include/linux/energy_model.h | 20 +++++++++++++-------
>>   1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/energy_model.h b/include/linux/energy_model.h
>> index 8f055ab356ed..41290ee2cdd0 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/energy_model.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/energy_model.h
>> @@ -261,15 +261,14 @@ static inline unsigned long em_cpu_energy(struct em_perf_domain *pd,
>>                                  unsigned long max_util, unsigned long sum_util,
>>                                  unsigned long allowed_cpu_cap)
>>   {
>> +       struct em_perf_table *runtime_table;
> 
> You may as well call it just "table".  The "runtime_" prefix doesn't
> add much value here IMO.

Yes, I'll do that

Thank you Rafael for the review of the patch set!

Regards,
Lukasz