From: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
To: Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@codeaurora.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>,
Tim Murray <timmurray@google.com>, Todd Kjos <tkjos@android.com>,
Andres Oportus <andresoportus@google.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] sched/fair: add util_est on top of PELT
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2017 12:13:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170904111340.GC2618@e110439-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEU1=PnypZ7V5yL6K3fT_OpfTosK15ju0vcztk8NpDj9xVu4xw@mail.gmail.com>
On 29-Aug 10:06, Pavan Kondeti wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
>
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Patrick Bellasi
> <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> wrote:
> > The util_avg signal computed by PELT is too variable for some use-cases.
> > For example, a big task waking up after a long sleep period will have its
> > utilization almost completely decayed. This introduces some latency before
> > schedutil will be able to pick the best frequency to run a task.
> >
> > The same issue can affect task placement. Indeed, since the task
> > utilization is already decayed at wakeup, when the task is enqueued in a
> > CPU, this can results in a CPU running a big task as being temporarily
> > represented as being almost empty. This leads to a race condition where
> > other tasks can be potentially allocated on a CPU which just started to run
> > a big task which slept for a relatively long period.
> >
> > Moreover, the utilization of a task is, by PELT definition, a continuously
> > changing metrics. This contributes in making almost instantly outdated some
> > decisions based on the value of the PELT's utilization.
> >
> > For all these reasons, a more stable signal could probably do a better job
> > of representing the expected/estimated utilization of a SE/RQ. Such a
> > signal can be easily created on top of PELT by still using it as an
> > estimator which produces values to be aggregated once meaningful events
> > happens.
> >
> > This patch adds a simple implementation of util_est, a new signal built on
> > top of PELT's util_avg where:
> >
> > util_est(se) = max(se::util_avg, f(se::util_avg@dequeue_times))
> >
>
> I don't see any wrapper function in this patch that implements this
> signal. You want to use this signal in the task placement path as a
> replacement of task_util(), right?
You right, I should update this changelog which is a bit misleading.
What I'm writing above is the way we combine a task's estimated
utilization with its util_avg. That's what you find in the code of the
following patches, but strictly speacking we do not have a wrapper
function.
> Thanks,
> Pavan
Cheers Patrick
--
#include <best/regards.h>
Patrick Bellasi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-04 11:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-25 10:20 [RFC 0/3] Utilization estimation for FAIR tasks Patrick Bellasi
2017-08-25 10:20 ` [RFC 1/3] sched/fair: add util_est on top of PELT Patrick Bellasi
2017-08-29 4:36 ` Pavan Kondeti
2017-09-04 11:13 ` Patrick Bellasi [this message]
2017-08-29 6:41 ` Pavan Kondeti
2017-09-04 10:59 ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-08-25 10:20 ` [RFC 2/3] sched/fair: use util_est in LB Patrick Bellasi
2017-08-29 4:45 ` Pavan Kondeti
2017-09-04 14:18 ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-09-04 14:59 ` Pavan Kondeti
2017-08-25 10:20 ` [RFC 3/3] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: use util_est for OPP selection Patrick Bellasi
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=20170904111340.GC2618@e110439-lin \
--to=patrick.bellasi@arm.com \
--cc=andresoportus@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=joelaf@google.com \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=juri.lelli@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=pkondeti@codeaurora.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=timmurray@google.com \
--cc=tkjos@android.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).