From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S968887AbeE3JkH (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2018 05:40:07 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:53092 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965196AbeE3JkG (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2018 05:40:06 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 10:40:01 +0100 From: Patrick Bellasi To: Vincent Guittot Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, juri.lelli@redhat.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, valentin.schneider@arm.com, quentin.perret@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 03/10] cpufreq/schedutil: add rt utilization tracking Message-ID: <20180530094001.GH30654@e110439-lin> References: <1527253951-22709-1-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> <1527253951-22709-4-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1527253951-22709-4-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 25-May 15:12, Vincent Guittot wrote: > Add both cfs and rt utilization when selecting an OPP for cfs tasks as rt > can preempt and steal cfs's running time. > > Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot > --- > kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 14 +++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c > index 28592b6..a84b5a5 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c > @@ -56,6 +56,7 @@ struct sugov_cpu { > /* The fields below are only needed when sharing a policy: */ > unsigned long util_cfs; > unsigned long util_dl; > + unsigned long util_rt; > unsigned long max; > > /* The field below is for single-CPU policies only: */ > @@ -178,14 +179,21 @@ static void sugov_get_util(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu) > sg_cpu->max = arch_scale_cpu_capacity(NULL, sg_cpu->cpu); > sg_cpu->util_cfs = cpu_util_cfs(rq); > sg_cpu->util_dl = cpu_util_dl(rq); > + sg_cpu->util_rt = cpu_util_rt(rq); > } > > static unsigned long sugov_aggregate_util(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu) > { > struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(sg_cpu->cpu); > + unsigned long util; > > - if (rq->rt.rt_nr_running) > - return sg_cpu->max; > + if (rq->rt.rt_nr_running) { > + util = sg_cpu->max; Why not just adding the following lines while keeping the return in for the rq->rt.rt_nr_running case? > + } else { > + util = sg_cpu->util_dl; > + util += sg_cpu->util_cfs; > + util += sg_cpu->util_rt; > + } > > /* > * Utilization required by DEADLINE must always be granted while, for > @@ -197,7 +205,7 @@ static unsigned long sugov_aggregate_util(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu) > * util_cfs + util_dl as requested freq. However, cpufreq is not yet > * ready for such an interface. So, we only do the latter for now. > */ > - return min(sg_cpu->max, (sg_cpu->util_dl + sg_cpu->util_cfs)); > + return min(sg_cpu->max, util); ... for the rq->rt.rt_nr_running case we don't really need to min clamp util = sg_cpu->max with itself... > } > > static void sugov_set_iowait_boost(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu, u64 time, unsigned int flags) > -- > 2.7.4 > -- #include Patrick Bellasi