From: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>
To: Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@intel.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
"peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"mingo@kernel.org" <mingo@kernel.org>,
"rjw@rjwysocki.net" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
"vincent.guittot@linaro.org" <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
"daniel.lezcano@linaro.org" <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
"preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <Dietmar.Eggemann@arm.com>,
"pjt@google.com" <pjt@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 00/23] sched: Energy cost model for energy-aware scheduling
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2014 15:16:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140707141627.GB4485@e103687> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140706190523.GA12113@intel.com>
On Sun, Jul 06, 2014 at 08:05:23PM +0100, Yuyang Du wrote:
> Hi Morten,
>
> Thanks, got it. Then another question,
>
> On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 12:06:13PM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> > The patch set essentially puts tasks where it is most energy-efficient
> > guided by the platform energy model. That should benefit any platform,
> > SMP and big.LITTLE. That is at least the goal.
> >
>
> I understand energy_diff_* functions are based on the energy model (though I
> have not dived into the detail of how you change load balancing based on
> energy_diff_*).
>
> Speaking of the engergy model, I am not sure why elaborate "imprecise" energy
> numbers do a better job than only a general statement: higher freq, more cap,
> and more power.
The idea is that the energy model allows the scheduler to estimate the
energy efficiency of the cpus under any load scenario. That way, the
scheduler can estimate the energy implications of every choice it makes.
Whether it is cheaper (in terms of energy) to increase frequency on the
currently awake cpu instead of waking up more. Which cpu is the cheapest
to wake up if another one is needed. And so on.
> Even for big.LITTLE systems, big and little CPUs also follow that statement
> respectively. Then it is just a matter of where to place tasks between them.
> Under such, the energy model might be useful, but still probably cpu_power_orig
> (from Vincent) might be enough.
cpu_power doesn't tell you anything about energy-efficiency. There is no
link with frequency scaling. No representation of power domains. I don't
see how you can make energy aware decisions without having just a vague
idea about the impact of decisions. You need to consider energy
efficiency to get the most out of big.LITTLE. I believe the same is true
to some extend for SMP systems with aggressive cpu power management.
Could you elaborate on what you mean by 'a general statement'?
Thanks,
Morten
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-07 14:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-03 16:25 [RFCv2 PATCH 00/23] sched: Energy cost model for energy-aware scheduling Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:25 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 01/23] sched: Documentation for scheduler energy cost model Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-24 0:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-24 7:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-24 14:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-24 17:57 ` Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:25 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 02/23] sched: Make energy awareness a sched feature Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:25 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 03/23] sched: Introduce energy data structures Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:25 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 04/23] sched: Allocate and initialize " Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:25 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 05/23] sched: Add energy procfs interface Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:25 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 06/23] arm: topology: Define TC2 energy and provide it to the scheduler Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:25 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 07/23] sched: Introduce system-wide sched_energy Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:25 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 08/23] sched: Aggregate unweighted load contributed by task entities on parenting cfs_rq Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 23:50 ` Yuyang Du
2014-07-03 16:25 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 09/23] sched: Maintain the unweighted load contribution of blocked entities Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:25 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 10/23] sched: Account for blocked unweighted load waking back up Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:25 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 11/23] sched: Introduce an unweighted cpu_load array Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:25 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 12/23] sched: Rename weighted_cpuload() to cpu_load() Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:26 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 13/23] sched: Introduce weighted/unweighted switch in load related functions Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:26 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 14/23] sched: Introduce SD_SHARE_CAP_STATES sched_domain flag Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:26 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 15/23] sched, cpufreq: Introduce current cpu compute capacity into scheduler Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:26 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 16/23] sched, cpufreq: Current compute capacity hack for ARM TC2 Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:26 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 17/23] sched: Likely idle state statistics placeholder Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:26 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 18/23] sched: Energy model functions Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:26 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 19/23] sched: Task wakeup tracking Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:26 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 20/23] sched: Take task wakeups into account in energy estimates Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:26 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 21/23] sched: Use energy model in select_idle_sibling Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:26 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 22/23] sched: Use energy to guide wakeup task placement Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 16:26 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 23/23] sched: Use energy model in load balance path Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-03 23:19 ` [RFCv2 PATCH 00/23] sched: Energy cost model for energy-aware scheduling Yuyang Du
2014-07-04 11:06 ` Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-04 16:03 ` Anca Emanuel
2014-07-06 19:05 ` Yuyang Du
2014-07-07 14:16 ` Morten Rasmussen [this message]
2014-07-08 0:23 ` Yuyang Du
2014-07-08 9:28 ` Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-04 16:55 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-07 14:00 ` Morten Rasmussen
2014-07-07 15:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20140707141627.GB4485@e103687 \
--to=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=Dietmar.Eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=yuyang.du@intel.com \
/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).