From: Claudio Scordino <claudio@evidence.eu.com>
To: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Todd Kjos <tkjos@android.com>, Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: schedutil: rate limits for SCHED_DEADLINE
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2018 12:15:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <870e5cb6-bb3b-7d51-93b3-db4928f700b4@evidence.eu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1519815970-5686-1-git-send-email-claudio@evidence.eu.com>
Dear Rafael, dear Viresh,
Il 28/02/2018 12:06, Claudio Scordino ha scritto:
> When the SCHED_DEADLINE scheduling class increases the CPU utilization,
> we should not wait for the rate limit, otherwise we may miss some
> deadline.
>
> Tests using rt-app on Exynos5422 with up to 10 SCHED_DEADLINE tasks have
> shown reductions of even 10% of deadline misses with a negligible
> increase of energy consumption (measured through Baylibre Cape).
As a follow up of the previous thread, I've put some figures here: https://gist.github.com/claudioscordino/d4a10e8b3ceac419fb0c8b552db19806
In some cases, I've noticed the patch to even reduce the energy consumption (due to a mix of factors plus DL tasks entering the inactive state sooner).
I've also tried to create the "ramp-up" scenario by allocating 10 DL tasks on the same core, but it didn't produce any significant increase of consumption.
IMHO, the overall behavior looks better.
Best regards,
Claudio
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-28 11:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-28 11:06 [PATCH v2] cpufreq: schedutil: rate limits for SCHED_DEADLINE Claudio Scordino
2018-02-28 11:15 ` Claudio Scordino [this message]
2018-02-28 11:22 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-05 6:13 ` Viresh Kumar
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=870e5cb6-bb3b-7d51-93b3-db4928f700b4@evidence.eu.com \
--to=claudio@evidence.eu.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=joelaf@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=patrick.bellasi@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.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