From: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
To: Seiichi Ikarashi <s.ikarashi@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Radivoje Jovanovic <radivoje.jovanovic@intel.com>,
Mathias Krause <minipli@googlemail.com>,
Ajay Thomas <ajay.thomas.david.rajamanickam@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] powercap, intel_rapl, implement get_max_time_window
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 11:26:17 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56A25829.7000200@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56A1777F.6070809@jp.fujitsu.com>
On 01/21/2016 07:27 PM, Seiichi Ikarashi wrote:
> On 2016-01-22 01:15, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
>> The MSR_PKG_POWER_INFO register (Intel ASDM, section 14.9.3
>> "Package RAPL Domain") provides a maximum time window which the
>> system can support. This window is read-only and is currently
>> not examined when setting the time windows for the package.
>>
>> This patch implements get_max_time_window_us() and checks the window when
>> a user attempts to set power capping for the package.
>>
>> Before the patch it was possible to set the window to, for example, 10000
>> micro seconds:
>>
>> [root@intel-chiefriver-03 rhel7]# echo 10000 >
>> /sys/devices/virtual/powercap/intel-rapl/intel-rapl\:0/constraint_0_time_window_us;
>> egrep ^ /sys/devices/virtual/powercap/intel-rapl/intel-rapl\:0/constraint_0_time_window_us
>>
>> /sys/devices/virtual/powercap/intel-rapl/intel-rapl:0/constraint_0_time_window_us:1:9765
>>
>> but from 'turbostat -d', the package is limited to 976us:
>>
>> cpu0: MSR_PKG_POWER_INFO: 0x01200168 (45 W TDP, RAPL 36 - 0 W, 0.000977 sec.)
>>
>> (Note, there appears to be a rounding issue in turbostat which needs to
>> also be fixed. Looking at the values in the register it is clear the
>> value is 1/1024 = 976us.)
>>
>> After the patch we are limited by the maximum time window:
>>
>> [root@intel-chiefriver-03 rhel7]# echo 10000 >
>> /sys/devices/virtual/powercap/intel-rapl/intel-rapl\:0/constraint_0_time_window_us;
>> egrep ^ /sys/devices/virtual/powercap/intel-rapl/intel-rapl\:0/constraint_0_time_window_us
>>
>> -bash: echo: write error: Invalid argument
>> /sys/devices/virtual/powercap/intel-rapl/intel-rapl:0/constraint_0_time_window_us:1:976
>>
>> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>> Cc: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Radivoje Jovanovic <radivoje.jovanovic@intel.com>
>> Cc: Seiichi Ikarashi <s.ikarashi@jp.fujitsu.com>
>> Cc: Mathias Krause <minipli@googlemail.com>
>> Cc: Ajay Thomas <ajay.thomas.david.rajamanickam@intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/powercap/intel_rapl.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> drivers/powercap/powercap_sys.c | 6 ++++--
>> 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl.c b/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl.c
>> index cc97f08..f765b2c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl.c
>> +++ b/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl.c
>> @@ -493,13 +493,42 @@ static int get_current_power_limit(struct powercap_zone *power_zone, int id,
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> +static int get_max_time_window(struct powercap_zone *power_zone, int id,
>> + u64 *data)
>
> The 2nd arg "id" is not necessary.
It is required by the powercap_sys code. If I remove this then I have to create
separate sysfs store and show files and I think it isn't worth it to do so.
P.
>
> --
> Seiichi
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-22 16:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-21 16:15 [PATCH 0/3] powercap, intel_rapl, implement time window checks Prarit Bhargava
2016-01-21 16:15 ` [PATCH 1/3] powercap, intel_rapl, implement get_max_time_window Prarit Bhargava
2016-01-22 0:27 ` Seiichi Ikarashi
2016-01-22 16:26 ` Prarit Bhargava [this message]
2016-01-21 16:15 ` [PATCH 2/3] powercap, intel_rapl, implement check for minimum time window Prarit Bhargava
2016-01-21 16:15 ` [PATCH 3/3] powercap, intel_rapl, Add ignore_max_time_window_check module parameter for broken BIOSes Prarit Bhargava
2016-01-22 0:28 ` Seiichi Ikarashi
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-01-25 0:44 [PATCH 0/3] powercap, intel_rapl, implement time window checks [v3] Prarit Bhargava
2016-01-25 0:44 ` [PATCH 1/3] powercap, intel_rapl, implement get_max_time_window Prarit Bhargava
2015-12-15 13:02 [PATCH 0/3] powercap, intel_rapl, implement time window checks Prarit Bhargava
2015-12-15 13:02 ` [PATCH 1/3] powercap, intel_rapl, implement get_max_time_window Prarit Bhargava
2015-12-17 5:45 ` Seiichi Ikarashi
2015-12-17 12:26 ` Prarit Bhargava
2015-12-21 14:50 ` [PATCH 0/3 v2] powercap, intel_rapl, implement time window checks Prarit Bhargava
2015-12-21 14:50 ` [PATCH 1/3] powercap, intel_rapl, implement get_max_time_window Prarit Bhargava
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=56A25829.7000200@redhat.com \
--to=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=ajay.thomas.david.rajamanickam@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=minipli@googlemail.com \
--cc=radivoje.jovanovic@intel.com \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=s.ikarashi@jp.fujitsu.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).