From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: governor: Be friendly towards latency-sensitive bursty workloads
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 15:02:33 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <538D9631.9090500@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKohpokdnHag=79cXuwgNjX-k+JJU9GE3KUBhixcj3PZ6y78GQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 06/03/2014 01:48 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 27 May 2014 02:23, Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Looks fine, some nits..
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
>> -void dbs_check_cpu(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, int cpu)
>> +void dbs_check_cpu(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, int cpu,
>> + unsigned int sampling_rate)
>
> We don't need to pass a new argument, we can get all the information from
> dbs_data alone. Its already done for multiple routines. Let me know if you
> find it difficult to figure out..
>
Sure, that would be a good improvement. Does something like the patch below
look good? I have only compile-tested it. I'll send out the patch with changelog
once I finish testing it.
Thank you!
Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
index e1c6433..3e8588f 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
@@ -36,14 +36,29 @@ void dbs_check_cpu(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, int cpu)
struct od_dbs_tuners *od_tuners = dbs_data->tuners;
struct cs_dbs_tuners *cs_tuners = dbs_data->tuners;
struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
+ unsigned int sampling_rate;
unsigned int max_load = 0;
unsigned int ignore_nice;
unsigned int j;
- if (dbs_data->cdata->governor == GOV_ONDEMAND)
+ if (dbs_data->cdata->governor == GOV_ONDEMAND) {
+ struct od_cpu_dbs_info_s *od_dbs_info;
+
+ /*
+ * Sometimes, the ondemand governor uses an additional
+ * multiplier to give long delays. So apply this multiplier to
+ * the 'sampling_rate', so as to keep the wake-up-from-idle
+ * detection logic a bit conservative.
+ */
+ sampling_rate = od_tuners->sampling_rate;
+ od_dbs_info = dbs_data->cdata->get_cpu_dbs_info_s(cpu);
+ sampling_rate *= od_dbs_info->rate_mult;
+
ignore_nice = od_tuners->ignore_nice_load;
- else
+ } else {
+ sampling_rate = cs_tuners->sampling_rate;
ignore_nice = cs_tuners->ignore_nice_load;
+ }
policy = cdbs->cur_policy;
@@ -96,7 +111,29 @@ void dbs_check_cpu(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, int cpu)
if (unlikely(!wall_time || wall_time < idle_time))
continue;
- load = 100 * (wall_time - idle_time) / wall_time;
+ /*
+ * If the CPU had gone completely idle, and a task just woke up
+ * on this CPU now, it would be unfair to calculate 'load' the
+ * usual way for this elapsed time-window, because it will show
+ * near-zero load, irrespective of how CPU intensive the new
+ * task is. This is undesirable for latency-sensitive bursty
+ * workloads.
+ *
+ * To avoid this, we reuse the 'load' from the previous
+ * time-window and give this task a chance to start with a
+ * reasonably high CPU frequency.
+ *
+ * Detecting this situation is easy: the governor's deferrable
+ * timer would not have fired during CPU-idle periods. Hence
+ * an unusually large 'wall_time' (as compared to the sampling
+ * rate) indicates this scenario.
+ */
+ if (unlikely(wall_time > (2 * sampling_rate))) {
+ load = j_cdbs->prev_load;
+ } else {
+ load = 100 * (wall_time - idle_time) / wall_time;
+ j_cdbs->prev_load = load;
+ }
if (load > max_load)
max_load = load;
@@ -323,6 +360,10 @@ int cpufreq_governor_dbs(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
j_cdbs->cur_policy = policy;
j_cdbs->prev_cpu_idle = get_cpu_idle_time(j,
&j_cdbs->prev_cpu_wall, io_busy);
+ j_cdbs->prev_load = 100 * (j_cdbs->prev_cpu_wall -
+ j_cdbs->prev_cpu_idle) /
+ j_cdbs->prev_cpu_wall;
+
if (ignore_nice)
j_cdbs->prev_cpu_nice =
kcpustat_cpu(j).cpustat[CPUTIME_NICE];
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h
index bfb9ae1..b56552b 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h
@@ -134,6 +134,7 @@ struct cpu_dbs_common_info {
u64 prev_cpu_idle;
u64 prev_cpu_wall;
u64 prev_cpu_nice;
+ unsigned int prev_load;
struct cpufreq_policy *cur_policy;
struct delayed_work work;
/*
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-03 9:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-26 20:53 [PATCH] cpufreq: governor: Be friendly towards latency-sensitive bursty workloads Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-05-26 23:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-27 3:15 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-06-02 7:33 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2014-06-02 8:15 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-06-03 5:16 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2014-06-03 5:49 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-06-03 8:18 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-06-03 9:32 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat [this message]
2014-06-03 9:39 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-06-03 10:04 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-06-03 10:08 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-06-03 10:13 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-06-03 10:16 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-06-03 10:16 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-06-07 9:55 ` Pavel Machek
2014-06-07 12:35 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
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=538D9631.9090500@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--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).