From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Juri Lelli Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] Introduce thermal pressure Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 14:23:48 +0200 Message-ID: <20181010122348.GL9130@localhost.localdomain> References: <1539102302-9057-1-git-send-email-thara.gopinath@linaro.org> <20181010061751.GA37224@gmail.com> <20181010082933.4ful4dzk7rkijcwu@queper01-lin> <20181010095459.orw2gse75klpwosx@queper01-lin> <20181010103623.ttjexasymdpi66lu@queper01-lin> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Vincent Guittot Cc: Quentin Perret , Ingo Molnar , Thara Gopinath , linux-kernel , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Zhang Rui , "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Amit Kachhap , viresh kumar , Javi Merino , Eduardo Valentin , Daniel Lezcano , "open list:THERMAL" , Ionela Voinescu List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On 10/10/18 14:04, Vincent Guittot wrote: [...] > The problem was the same with RT, the cfs utilization was lower than > reality because RT steals soem cycle to CFS > So schedutil was selecting a lower frequency when cfs was running > whereas the CPU was fully used. > The same can happen with thermal: > cap the max freq because of thermal > the utilization with decrease. > remove the cap > the utilization is still low and you will select a low OPP because you > don't take into account cycle stolen by thermal like with RT What if we scale frequency component considering the capped temporary max?