Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845: Add CPU BWMON

Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-06-07T06:48:27Z

On 06/06/2022 22:39, Georgi Djakov wrote:
> On 1.06.22 13:11, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Add device node for CPU-memory BWMON device (bandwidth monitoring) on
>> SDM845 measuring bandwidth between CPU (gladiator_noc) and Last Level
>> Cache (memnoc). Usage of this BWMON allows to remove fixed bandwidth
>> votes from cpufreq (CPU nodes) thus achieve high memory throughput even
>> with lower CPU frequencies.
>>
>> Performance impact (SDM845-MTP RB3 board, linux next-20220422):
>> 1. No noticeable impact when running with schedutil or performance
>> governors.
>>
>> 2. When comparing to customized kernel with synced interconnects and
>> without bandwidth votes from CPU freq, the sysbench memory tests
>> show significant improvement with bwmon for blocksizes past the L3
>> cache. The results for such superficial comparison:
>>
>> sysbench memory test, results in MB/s (higher is better)
>> bs kB | type | V | V+no bw votes | bwmon | benefit %
>> 1 | W/seq | 14795 | 4816 | 4985 | 3.5%
>> 64 | W/seq | 41987 | 10334 | 10433 | 1.0%
>> 4096 | W/seq | 29768 | 8728 | 32007 | 266.7%
>> 65536 | W/seq | 17711 | 4846 | 18399 | 279.6%
>> 262144 | W/seq | 16112 | 4538 | 17429 | 284.1%
>> 64 | R/seq | 61202 | 67092 | 66804 | -0.4%
>> 4096 | R/seq | 23871 | 5458 | 24307 | 345.4%
>> 65536 | R/seq | 18554 | 4240 | 18685 | 340.7%
>> 262144 | R/seq | 17524 | 4207 | 17774 | 322.4%
>> 64 | W/rnd | 2663 | 1098 | 1119 | 1.9%
>> 65536 | W/rnd | 600 | 316 | 610 | 92.7%
>> 64 | R/rnd | 4915 | 4784 | 4594 | -4.0%
>> 65536 | R/rnd | 664 | 281 | 678 | 140.7%
>>
>> Legend:
>> bs kB: block size in KB (small block size means only L1-3 caches are
>> used
>> type: R - read, W - write, seq - sequential, rnd - random
>> V: vanilla (next-20220422)
>> V + no bw votes: vanilla without bandwidth votes from CPU freq
>> bwmon: bwmon without bandwidth votes from CPU freq
>> benefit %: difference between vanilla without bandwidth votes and bwmon
>> (higher is better)
>>
>
> Ok, now i see! So bwmon shows similar performance compared with the current
> cpufreq-based bandwidth scaling. And if you add bwmon on top of vanilla, are
> the results close/same?

Vanilla + bwmon results in almost no difference.

> Is the plan to remove the cpufreq based bandwidth
> scaling and switch to bwmon? It might improve the power consumption in some
> scenarios.

The next plan would be to implement the second bwmon, one between CPU
and caches. With both of them, the cpufreq bandwidth votes can be
removed (I think Android might be interested in this).

Best regards,
Krzysztof