From: Eric Piel <Eric.Piel@tremplin-utc.net>
To: Jan De Luyck <lkml@kcore.org>
Cc: davej@redhat.com, cpufreq@zenii.linux.org.uk,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux@dominikbrodowski.net
Subject: Re: cpufreq on-demand governor up_treshold?
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:57:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <42354400.7070500@tremplin-utc.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200503140829.04750.lkml@kcore.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1092 bytes --]
Jan De Luyck a écrit :
> Hello lists,
>
> (please cc me from cpufreq list)
>
> I've since yesterday started using the ondemand governor. Seems to work fine,
> tho I can't seem to find a reason why it keeps scaling my processor speed
> upwards tho the processor use never exceeds 30% (been watching top -d 1).
:
:
> Any hints?
You can try the three attached patches in the order :
ondemand-cleanup-factorise-idle-measurement-2.6.11.patch
ondemand-save-idle-up-for-all-cpu-2.6.11.patch
ondemand-automatic-downscaling-2.6.11-accepted.patch
They are available on the cpufreq list but as it's difficult to access
it I'm sending them again, all together. These are the last things that
Venki and I have been working on. It should solve your problem
(actually, only the last patch, but it depends on the two previous
patches). Please, let me know if it works.
BTW, DaveJ, Dominik, I couldn't find them in the daily-snapshot
available at codemonkey.org.uk. Should I worry, or is it just due to
some latency between your private trees and the public one?
Eric
[-- Attachment #2: ondemand-automatic-downscaling-2.6.11-accepted.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 5003 bytes --]
diff -purN linux-2.6.11/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c linux-2.6.11-new/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
--- linux-2.6.11/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c 2005-03-07 17:57:31.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.11-new/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c 2005-03-07 17:53:17.000000000 -0800
@@ -34,13 +34,9 @@
*/
#define DEF_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD (80)
-#define MIN_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD (0)
+#define MIN_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD (10)
#define MAX_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD (100)
-#define DEF_FREQUENCY_DOWN_THRESHOLD (20)
-#define MIN_FREQUENCY_DOWN_THRESHOLD (0)
-#define MAX_FREQUENCY_DOWN_THRESHOLD (100)
-
/*
* The polling frequency of this governor depends on the capability of
* the processor. Default polling frequency is 1000 times the transition
@@ -78,12 +74,10 @@ struct dbs_tuners {
unsigned int sampling_rate;
unsigned int sampling_down_factor;
unsigned int up_threshold;
- unsigned int down_threshold;
};
static struct dbs_tuners dbs_tuners_ins = {
.up_threshold = DEF_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD,
- .down_threshold = DEF_FREQUENCY_DOWN_THRESHOLD,
.sampling_down_factor = DEF_SAMPLING_DOWN_FACTOR,
};
@@ -115,7 +109,6 @@ static ssize_t show_##file_name \
show_one(sampling_rate, sampling_rate);
show_one(sampling_down_factor, sampling_down_factor);
show_one(up_threshold, up_threshold);
-show_one(down_threshold, down_threshold);
static ssize_t store_sampling_down_factor(struct cpufreq_policy *unused,
const char *buf, size_t count)
@@ -161,8 +154,7 @@ static ssize_t store_up_threshold(struct
down(&dbs_sem);
if (ret != 1 || input > MAX_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD ||
- input < MIN_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD ||
- input <= dbs_tuners_ins.down_threshold) {
+ input < MIN_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD) {
up(&dbs_sem);
return -EINVAL;
}
@@ -173,26 +165,6 @@ static ssize_t store_up_threshold(struct
return count;
}
-static ssize_t store_down_threshold(struct cpufreq_policy *unused,
- const char *buf, size_t count)
-{
- unsigned int input;
- int ret;
- ret = sscanf (buf, "%u", &input);
-
- down(&dbs_sem);
- if (ret != 1 || input > MAX_FREQUENCY_DOWN_THRESHOLD ||
- input < MIN_FREQUENCY_DOWN_THRESHOLD ||
- input >= dbs_tuners_ins.up_threshold) {
- up(&dbs_sem);
- return -EINVAL;
- }
-
- dbs_tuners_ins.down_threshold = input;
- up(&dbs_sem);
-
- return count;
-}
#define define_one_rw(_name) \
static struct freq_attr _name = \
@@ -201,7 +173,6 @@ __ATTR(_name, 0644, show_##_name, store_
define_one_rw(sampling_rate);
define_one_rw(sampling_down_factor);
define_one_rw(up_threshold);
-define_one_rw(down_threshold);
static struct attribute * dbs_attributes[] = {
&sampling_rate_max.attr,
@@ -209,7 +180,6 @@ static struct attribute * dbs_attributes
&sampling_rate.attr,
&sampling_down_factor.attr,
&up_threshold.attr,
- &down_threshold.attr,
NULL
};
@@ -222,8 +192,8 @@ static struct attribute_group dbs_attr_g
static void dbs_check_cpu(int cpu)
{
- unsigned int idle_ticks, up_idle_ticks, down_idle_ticks;
- unsigned int freq_down_step;
+ unsigned int idle_ticks, up_idle_ticks, total_ticks;
+ unsigned int freq_next;
unsigned int freq_down_sampling_rate;
static int down_skip[NR_CPUS];
struct cpu_dbs_info_s *this_dbs_info;
@@ -290,7 +260,12 @@ static void dbs_check_cpu(int cpu)
down_skip[cpu]++;
if (down_skip[cpu] < dbs_tuners_ins.sampling_down_factor)
return;
+ down_skip[cpu] = 0;
+ /* don't try to decrease the frequency if it's already the min */
+ if (policy->cur == policy->min)
+ return;
+
idle_ticks = UINT_MAX;
for_each_cpu_mask(j, policy->cpus) {
unsigned int tmp_idle_ticks, total_idle_ticks;
@@ -308,27 +283,23 @@ static void dbs_check_cpu(int cpu)
idle_ticks = tmp_idle_ticks;
}
- /* Scale idle ticks by 100 and compare with up and down ticks */
- idle_ticks *= 100;
- down_skip[cpu] = 0;
-
+ /* Compute how many ticks there are between two measurements */
freq_down_sampling_rate = dbs_tuners_ins.sampling_rate *
dbs_tuners_ins.sampling_down_factor;
- down_idle_ticks = (100 - dbs_tuners_ins.down_threshold) *
- sampling_rate_in_HZ(freq_down_sampling_rate);
-
- if (idle_ticks > down_idle_ticks) {
- freq_down_step = (5 * policy->max) / 100;
-
- /* max freq cannot be less than 100. But who knows.... */
- if (unlikely(freq_down_step == 0))
- freq_down_step = 5;
+ total_ticks = sampling_rate_in_HZ(freq_down_sampling_rate);
+
+ /*
+ * The optimal frequency is the frequency that is the lowest that
+ * can support the current CPU usage without triggering
+ * the up policy. To be safe, we focus 10 points under the threshold.
+ */
+ freq_next = ((total_ticks - idle_ticks) * 100) / total_ticks;
+ freq_next = freq_next * policy->cur / (dbs_tuners_ins.up_threshold-10);
+ if (freq_next <= ((policy->cur * 95) / 100))
__cpufreq_driver_target(policy,
- policy->cur - freq_down_step,
- CPUFREQ_RELATION_H);
- return;
- }
+ freq_next,
+ CPUFREQ_RELATION_L);
}
static void do_dbs_timer(void *data)
[-- Attachment #3: ondemand-cleanup-factorise-idle-measurement-2.6.11.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 2487 bytes --]
--- linux-2.6.11/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c.bak 2005-02-06 23:35:41.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.11/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c 2005-03-06 19:04:12.000000000 +0100
@@ -223,7 +223,6 @@ static struct attribute_group dbs_attr_g
static void dbs_check_cpu(int cpu)
{
unsigned int idle_ticks, up_idle_ticks, down_idle_ticks;
- unsigned int total_idle_ticks;
unsigned int freq_down_step;
unsigned int freq_down_sampling_rate;
static int down_skip[NR_CPUS];
@@ -252,20 +251,11 @@ static void dbs_check_cpu(int cpu)
*/
/* Check for frequency increase */
- total_idle_ticks = kstat_cpu(cpu).cpustat.idle +
- kstat_cpu(cpu).cpustat.iowait;
- idle_ticks = total_idle_ticks -
- this_dbs_info->prev_cpu_idle_up;
- this_dbs_info->prev_cpu_idle_up = total_idle_ticks;
-
-
+ idle_ticks = UINT_MAX;
for_each_cpu_mask(j, policy->cpus) {
- unsigned int tmp_idle_ticks;
+ unsigned int tmp_idle_ticks, total_idle_ticks;
struct cpu_dbs_info_s *j_dbs_info;
- if (j == cpu)
- continue;
-
j_dbs_info = &per_cpu(cpu_dbs_info, j);
/* Check for frequency increase */
total_idle_ticks = kstat_cpu(j).cpustat.idle +
@@ -287,7 +277,7 @@ static void dbs_check_cpu(int cpu)
__cpufreq_driver_target(policy, policy->max,
CPUFREQ_RELATION_H);
down_skip[cpu] = 0;
- this_dbs_info->prev_cpu_idle_down = total_idle_ticks;
+ this_dbs_info->prev_cpu_idle_down = this_dbs_info->prev_cpu_idle_up;
return;
}
@@ -296,19 +286,11 @@ static void dbs_check_cpu(int cpu)
if (down_skip[cpu] < dbs_tuners_ins.sampling_down_factor)
return;
- total_idle_ticks = kstat_cpu(cpu).cpustat.idle +
- kstat_cpu(cpu).cpustat.iowait;
- idle_ticks = total_idle_ticks -
- this_dbs_info->prev_cpu_idle_down;
- this_dbs_info->prev_cpu_idle_down = total_idle_ticks;
-
+ idle_ticks = UINT_MAX;
for_each_cpu_mask(j, policy->cpus) {
- unsigned int tmp_idle_ticks;
+ unsigned int tmp_idle_ticks, total_idle_ticks;
struct cpu_dbs_info_s *j_dbs_info;
- if (j == cpu)
- continue;
-
j_dbs_info = &per_cpu(cpu_dbs_info, j);
/* Check for frequency increase */
total_idle_ticks = kstat_cpu(j).cpustat.idle +
@@ -330,7 +312,7 @@ static void dbs_check_cpu(int cpu)
down_idle_ticks = (100 - dbs_tuners_ins.down_threshold) *
sampling_rate_in_HZ(freq_down_sampling_rate);
- if (idle_ticks > down_idle_ticks ) {
+ if (idle_ticks > down_idle_ticks) {
freq_down_step = (5 * policy->max) / 100;
/* max freq cannot be less than 100. But who knows.... */
[-- Attachment #4: ondemand-save-idle-up-for-all-cpu-2.6.11.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 587 bytes --]
--- linux-2.6.11/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c.clean2 2005-03-06 19:04:12.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.11/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c 2005-03-06 19:09:52.000000000 +0100
@@ -277,7 +277,12 @@
__cpufreq_driver_target(policy, policy->max,
CPUFREQ_RELATION_H);
down_skip[cpu] = 0;
- this_dbs_info->prev_cpu_idle_down = this_dbs_info->prev_cpu_idle_up;
+ for_each_cpu_mask(j, policy->cpus) {
+ struct cpu_dbs_info_s *j_dbs_info;
+
+ j_dbs_info = &per_cpu(cpu_dbs_info, j);
+ j_dbs_info->prev_cpu_idle_down = j_dbs_info->prev_cpu_idle_up;
+ }
return;
}
[-- Attachment #5: Type: text/plain, Size: 147 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Cpufreq mailing list
Cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk
http://lists.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cpufreq
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-03-14 7:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-03-14 7:29 cpufreq on-demand governor up_treshold? Jan De Luyck
2005-03-14 7:57 ` Eric Piel [this message]
2005-03-14 11:19 ` Bruno Ducrot
2005-03-14 12:40 ` Jan De Luyck
2005-03-14 22:39 ` Dominik Brodowski
2005-05-11 1:33 ` Dave Jones
2005-05-11 2:34 ` Dave Jones
2005-05-11 12:19 ` Eric Piel
2005-05-11 12:23 ` [PATCH] [1/3] ondemand governor clean-up Eric Piel
2005-05-11 12:27 ` [PATCH][2/3] ondemand governor store the idle ticks for all cpus Eric Piel
2005-05-11 12:31 ` [PATCH][3/3] ondemand governor automatic downscaling Eric Piel
2005-05-12 23:16 ` cpufreq on-demand governor up_treshold? Eric Piel
2005-05-17 0:15 ` [PATCH] ondemand,conservative minor bug-fix and cleanup Venkatesh Pallipadi
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-05-11 16:00 cpufreq on-demand governor up_treshold? Pallipadi, Venkatesh
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=42354400.7070500@tremplin-utc.net \
--to=eric.piel@tremplin-utc.net \
--cc=cpufreq@zenii.linux.org.uk \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@dominikbrodowski.net \
--cc=lkml@kcore.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox