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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).