All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@codeaurora.org>
To: Quentin Perret <qperret@qperret.net>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com,
	vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
	juri.lelli@redhat.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net,
	morten.rasmussen@arm.com, valentin.schneider@arm.com,
	qais.yousef@arm.com, tkjos@google.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Speed-up energy-aware wake-ups
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 16:03:38 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190920103338.GB20250@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190920094115.GA11503@qperret.net>

Hi Quentin,

On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 11:41:15AM +0200, Quentin Perret wrote:
> Hi Pavan,
> 
> On Friday 20 Sep 2019 at 08:32:15 (+0530), Pavan Kondeti wrote:
> > Earlier, we are not checking the spare capacity for the prev_cpu. Now that the
> > continue statement is removed, prev_cpu could also be the max_spare_cap_cpu.
> > Actually that makes sense. Because there is no reason why we want to select
> > another CPU which has less spare capacity than previous CPU.
> > 
> > Is this behavior intentional?
> 
> The intent was indeed to not compute the energy for another CPU in
> prev_cpu's perf domain if prev_cpu is the one with max spare cap -- it
> is useless to do so since this other CPU cannot 'beat' prev_cpu and
> will never be chosen in the end.

Yes. Selecting the prev_cpu is the correct decision.

> 
> But I did miss that we'd end up computing the energy for prev_cpu
> twice ... Harmless but useless. So yeah, let's optimize that case too :)
> 
> > When prev_cpu == max_spare_cap_cpu, we are evaluating the energy again for the
> > same CPU below. That could have been skipped by returning prev_cpu when
> > prev_cpu == max_spare_cap_cpu.
> 
> Right, something like the patch below ? My test results are still
> looking good with it applied.
> 
> Thanks for the careful review,
> Quentin
> ---
> From 7b8258287f180a2c383ebe397e8129f5f898ffbe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Quentin Perret <qperret@qperret.net>
> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 09:07:20 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] sched/fair: Avoid redundant EAS calculation
> 
> The EAS wake-up path computes the system energy for several CPU
> candidates: the CPU with maximum spare capacity in each performance
> domain, and the prev_cpu. However, if prev_cpu also happens to be the
> CPU with maximum spare capacity in its performance domain, the energy
> calculation is still done twice, unnecessarily.
> 
> Add a condition to filter out this corner case before doing the energy
> calculation.
> 
> Reported-by: Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@qperret.net>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/fair.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index d4bbf68c3161..7399382bc291 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -6412,7 +6412,7 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu)
>  		}
>  
>  		/* Evaluate the energy impact of using this CPU. */
> -		if (max_spare_cap_cpu >= 0) {
> +		if (max_spare_cap_cpu >= 0 && max_spare_cap_cpu != prev_cpu) {
>  			cur_delta = compute_energy(p, max_spare_cap_cpu, pd);
>  			cur_delta -= base_energy_pd;
>  			if (cur_delta < best_delta) {
> -- 
> 2.22.1
> 

+1. Looks good to me.

-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.


  reply	other threads:[~2019-09-20 10:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-12  9:44 [PATCH] sched/fair: Speed-up energy-aware wake-ups Quentin Perret
2019-09-13 22:43 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Quentin Perret
2019-09-20  3:02 ` [PATCH] " Pavan Kondeti
2019-09-20  9:41   ` Quentin Perret
2019-09-20 10:33     ` Pavan Kondeti [this message]
2019-09-20 11:23       ` Quentin Perret
2019-09-25  8:41         ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-27  8:10     ` [tip: sched/urgent] sched/fair: Avoid redundant EAS calculation tip-bot2 for Quentin Perret

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=20190920103338.GB20250@codeaurora.org \
    --to=pkondeti@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \
    --cc=qperret@qperret.net \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=tkjos@google.com \
    --cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@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.