From: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@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>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>, Todd Kjos <tkjos@android.com>,
Tim Murray <timmurray@google.com>,
Andres Oportus <andresoportus@google.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Chris Redpath <chris.redpath@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] cpufreq: schedutil: fixes for flags updates
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 17:11:39 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170302171139.GE28760@e110439-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtAkCiXy_21FrL-e0NrMb9zraAfW_DJrnrvZy0GY_r=ddA@mail.gmail.com>
On 02-Mar 17:09, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On 2 March 2017 at 16:45, Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> wrote:
> > The current version of schedutil has some issues related to the management
> > of update flags used by systems with frequency domains spawning multiple CPUs.
> >
> > Each time a CPU utilisation update is issued by the scheduler a set of flags
> > are configured to define (mainly) which class is asking for a utilisation
> > update. These flags are then used by the frequency selection policy to
> > identify the OPP to choose.
> >
> > In the current implementation, CPU flags are overridden each time the
> > scheduler calls schedutil for an update. Such a behaviour produces issues
> > in these scenarios, where we assume CPU1 and CPU2 share the same frequency
> > domain:
> > a) a RT task which executed on CPU1 can keep the domain at an high frequency
> > for a long period of time, even if there are no longer RT tasks on
> > CPUs in that domain
>
> Normally this is dropped after a tick.
> Nevertheless, there is an issue if the freq_update_delay_ns is shorter
> than a tick because of sugov RT thread
Indeed, I've noticed that a small FAIR task running on CPU2 is quite
likely to be running at an higher OPP just because on the other CPU of
the same frequency domain (i.e. CPU1) sometimes we have the sugov RT
thread running.
In this case, the RT flag in CPU1 is never cleared when that core is
always idle but for the execution of the sugov thread.
--
#include <best/regards.h>
Patrick Bellasi
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-02 17:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-02 15:45 [PATCH 0/6] cpufreq: schedutil: fixes for flags updates Patrick Bellasi
2017-03-02 15:45 ` [PATCH 1/6] cpufreq: schedutil: reset sg_cpus's flags at IDLE enter Patrick Bellasi
2017-03-03 3:41 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-03-06 14:29 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-03-15 18:06 ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-03-28 22:18 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-04-07 14:59 ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-06-06 9:26 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-06-06 15:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-06-06 18:03 ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-03-02 15:45 ` [PATCH 2/6] cpufreq: schedutil: ignore the sugov kthread for frequencies selections Patrick Bellasi
2017-03-03 5:19 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-03-03 12:12 ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-03-06 5:08 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-03-06 14:35 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-03-15 18:02 ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-03-02 15:45 ` [PATCH 3/6] cpufreq: schedutil: ensure max frequency while running RT/DL tasks Patrick Bellasi
2017-03-03 8:31 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-03-03 12:38 ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-03-15 11:52 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-03-15 14:40 ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-03-15 23:32 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-03-17 11:36 ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-04-07 15:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-07 16:59 ` Patrick Bellasi
2017-03-02 15:45 ` [PATCH 4/6] cpufreq: schedutil: relax rate-limiting " Patrick Bellasi
2017-03-02 15:45 ` [PATCH 5/6] cpufreq: schedutil: avoid utilisation update when not necessary Patrick Bellasi
2017-03-02 15:45 ` [PATCH 6/6] sched/rt: fast switch to maximum frequency when RT tasks are scheduled Patrick Bellasi
2017-03-02 16:09 ` [PATCH 0/6] cpufreq: schedutil: fixes for flags updates Vincent Guittot
2017-03-02 17:11 ` Patrick Bellasi [this message]
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=20170302171139.GE28760@e110439-lin \
--to=patrick.bellasi@arm.com \
--cc=andresoportus@google.com \
--cc=chris.redpath@arm.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=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--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