From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754686AbeE2GcF (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 May 2018 02:32:05 -0400 Received: from mail-wr0-f194.google.com ([209.85.128.194]:38583 "EHLO mail-wr0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754466AbeE2GcD (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 May 2018 02:32:03 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZq535M1lWnQddh2c+/URPZOFHNU3z0TuaS81MwZCTtBzj+1kE2cD9FWC1HVwNbbBzP6HjSGyw== Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 08:31:58 +0200 From: Juri Lelli To: Joel Fernandes Cc: Vincent Guittot , peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, valentin.schneider@arm.com, quentin.perret@arm.com, Luca Abeni , Claudio Scordino , Joel Fernandes , Alessio Balsini Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 05/10] cpufreq/schedutil: get max utilization Message-ID: <20180529063158.GB8985@localhost.localdomain> References: <1527253951-22709-1-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> <1527253951-22709-6-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> <20180528101234.GA1293@localhost.localdomain> <20180529050833.GA226378@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180529050833.GA226378@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 28/05/18 22:08, Joel Fernandes wrote: > On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 12:12:34PM +0200, Juri Lelli wrote: > [..] > > > + > > > + util = max_t(unsigned long, util, READ_ONCE(rq->avg_dl.util_avg)); > > > + > > > + return util; > > > > Anyway, just a quick thought. I guess we should experiment with this a > > bit. Now, I don't unfortunately have a Arm platform at hand for testing. > > Claudio, Luca (now Cc-ed), would you be able to fire some tests with > > this change? > > > > Oh, adding Joel and Alessio as well that experimented with DEADLINE > > lately. > > I also feel that for power reasons, dl.util_avg shouldn't drive the OPP > beyond what the running bandwidth is, or atleast do that only if CFS tasks > are running and being preempted as you/Vincent mentioned in one of the > threads. It's however a bit awkward that we might be running at a higher OPP when CFS tasks are running (even though they are of less priority). :/ > With our DL experiments, I didn't measure power but got it to a point where > the OPP is scaling correctly based on DL parameters. I think Alessio did > measure power at his setup but I can't recall now. Alessio? I see. Thanks.