From: Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@codeaurora.org>
To: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/debug: Fix requested task uclamp values shown in procfs
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 07:25:47 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200511015547.GP19464@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <jhjblmvu5nn.mognet@arm.com>
On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 05:16:28PM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote:
>
> On 10/05/20 13:56, Pavankumar Kondeti wrote:
> > The intention of commit 96e74ebf8d59 ("sched/debug: Add task uclamp
> > values to SCHED_DEBUG procfs") was to print requested and effective
> > task uclamp values. The requested values printed are read from p->uclamp,
> > which holds the last effective values. Fix this by printing the values
> > from p->uclamp_req.
> >
> > Fixes: 96e74ebf8d59 ("sched/debug: Add task uclamp values to SCHED_DEBUG procfs")
> > Signed-off-by: Pavankumar Kondeti <pkondeti@codeaurora.org>
>
> Argh, Qais pointed this out to me ~ a week ago, and I left this in my todo
> stack. I goofed up, sorry!
>
> As Pavan points out, p->uclamp[foo] is just a cache of uclamp_eff_value(p,
> foo) from the last time p was enqueued and runnable - what we are
> interested in is indeed comparing this with the *requested* value.
>
> I wanted to send an example along with a patch, I guess that's the kick I
> needed!
>
>
> My setup is a busy loop, its per-task clamps are set to (256, 768) via
> sched_setattr(), and it's shoved in a cpu cgroup with uclamp settings of
> (50%, 50%)
>
> On the current master (e99332e7b4cd ("gcc-10: mark more functions __init to
> avoid section mismatch warnings")), this gives me:
>
> $ uclamp-get $PID # via sched_getattr()
> uclamp.min=256 uclamp.max=768
>
> $ cat /proc/$PID/sched | grep uclamp
> uclamp.min : 256
> uclamp.max : 512
> effective uclamp.min : 256
> effective uclamp.max : 512
>
> With Pavan's patch, I get:
>
> $ uclamp-get $PID # via sched_getattr()
> uclamp.min=256 uclamp.max=768
>
> $ cat /proc/$PID/sched | grep uclamp
> uclamp.min : 256
> uclamp.max : 768
> effective uclamp.min : 256
> effective uclamp.max : 512
>
>
> Minor print nit below, otherwise:
> Tested-and-reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
>
> Peter/Ingo, any chance this can go to sched/urgent? I know it's a debug
> interface, but I'd rather have it land in a shape that makes sense. Again,
> apologies for the goof.
>
> > ---
> > kernel/sched/debug.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/debug.c b/kernel/sched/debug.c
> > index a562df5..239970b 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/debug.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/debug.c
> > @@ -948,8 +948,8 @@ void proc_sched_show_task(struct task_struct *p, struct pid_namespace *ns,
> > P(se.avg.util_est.enqueued);
> > #endif
> > #ifdef CONFIG_UCLAMP_TASK
> > - __PS("uclamp.min", p->uclamp[UCLAMP_MIN].value);
> > - __PS("uclamp.max", p->uclamp[UCLAMP_MAX].value);
> > + __PS("uclamp.min", p->uclamp_req[UCLAMP_MIN].value);
> > + __PS("uclamp.max", p->uclamp_req[UCLAMP_MAX].value);
>
> While we're at it, I'd prepend this with "requested".
>
> > __PS("effective uclamp.min", uclamp_eff_value(p, UCLAMP_MIN));
> > __PS("effective uclamp.max", uclamp_eff_value(p, UCLAMP_MAX));
> > #endif
Thanks Valentin for taking a look. I have added "requested" prefix and sent
the patch.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-11 1:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-10 12:56 [PATCH] sched/debug: Fix requested task uclamp values shown in procfs Pavankumar Kondeti
2020-05-10 16:16 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-05-11 1:55 ` Pavan Kondeti [this message]
2020-05-19 18:44 ` [tip: sched/urgent] " tip-bot2 for Pavankumar Kondeti
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=20200511015547.GP19464@codeaurora.org \
--to=pkondeti@codeaurora.org \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@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