From: "Doug Smythies" <dsmythies@telus.net>
To: "'Viresh Kumar'" <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
"'Vincent Guittot'" <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"'Rafael Wysocki'" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
"'Srinivas Pandruvada'" <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
"'Len Brown'" <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V4 2/2] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Implement QoS supported freq constraints
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 23:35:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <001f01d54e7c$a22395d0$e66ac170$@net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190809021607.j4qj3jm72gbisvqh@vireshk-i7>
On 2019.08.08 19:16 Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 08-08-19, 09:25, Doug Smythies wrote:
>> On 2019.08.07 00:06 Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> Tested by: Doug Smythies <dsmythies@telus.net>
>> Thermald seems to now be working O.K. for all the governors.
>
> Thanks for testing Doug.
>
>> I do note that if one sets
>> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy*/scaling_max_freq
>> It seems to override subsequent attempts via
>> /sys/devices/system/cpu/intel_pstate/max_perf_pct.
>> Myself, I find this confusing.
>>
>> So the question becomes which one is the "master"?
>
> No one is master, cpufreq takes all the requests for frequency
> constraints and tries to set the value based on aggregation of all. So
> for max frequency, the lowest value wins and is shown up in sysfs.
>
> So, everything looks okay to me.
O.K. While I understand the explanations, I still struggle with
this scenario:
doug@s15:~/temp$ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/intel_pstate/max_perf_pct
50 <<< Note: 50% = 1.9 GHz in my system)
doug@s15:~/temp$ grep . /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy*/scaling_max_freq
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy0/scaling_max_freq:1900000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy1/scaling_max_freq:1900000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy2/scaling_max_freq:1900000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy3/scaling_max_freq:1900000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy4/scaling_max_freq:1900000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy5/scaling_max_freq:1900000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy6/scaling_max_freq:1900000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy7/scaling_max_freq:1900000
At this point I am not certain what I'll get if I try to
set max_perf_pct to 100%, nor do I know how to find out
with a user command.
So, I'll try it:
doug@s15:~/temp$ echo 100 | sudo tee /sys/devices/system/cpu/intel_pstate/max_perf_pct
100
doug@s15:~/temp$ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/intel_pstate/max_perf_pct
100 <<< Note: 100% = 3.8 GHz in my system)
doug@s15:~/temp$ grep . /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy*/scaling_max_freq
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy0/scaling_max_freq:2200000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy1/scaling_max_freq:2200000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy2/scaling_max_freq:2200000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy3/scaling_max_freq:2200000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy4/scaling_max_freq:2200000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy5/scaling_max_freq:2200000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy6/scaling_max_freq:2200000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy7/scaling_max_freq:2200000
I guess I had set it sometime earlier, forgot, and then didn't
get 3.8 Ghz as I had expected via max_perf_pct.
... Doug
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-09 6:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-07 7:06 [PATCH V4 1/2] cpufreq: schedutil: Don't skip freq update when limits change Viresh Kumar
2019-08-07 7:06 ` [PATCH V4 2/2] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Implement QoS supported freq constraints Viresh Kumar
2019-08-08 16:25 ` Doug Smythies
2019-08-08 16:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-09 2:16 ` Viresh Kumar
2019-08-09 6:35 ` Doug Smythies [this message]
2019-08-09 6:51 ` Viresh Kumar
2019-08-09 2:22 ` [PATCH V5 " Viresh Kumar
2019-08-09 5:48 ` Doug Smythies
2019-08-26 9:18 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='001f01d54e7c$a22395d0$e66ac170$@net' \
--to=dsmythies@telus.net \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.