From: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
Subject: [RESEND PATCH v1 0/2] Optimization CPU idle state impacted by tick
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 01:20:01 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1533835203-5789-1-git-send-email-leo.yan@linaro.org> (raw)
After Rafael's patch series 'sched/cpuidle: Idle loop rework' has been
merged in mainline kernel, it perfectly resolved the Powernightmares
issue [1] with not stopping the tick during the idle loop; we verified
this patch series on Arm platform (96boards Hikey620 with octa CA53
CPUs) with the rt-app [2] program to generate workloads: a single task
with below combinded configurations with period 5ms and duty cycle
1%/3%/5%/10%/20%/30%/40%.
After run these testing cases, we found the CPU cannot stay in deepest
idle state as expected, the issues essentialy are related with sched
tick:
The prominent issue is the criteria for decision stopping tick; now
the criteria is checking expected interval is less than TICK_USEC, but
this doesn't consider from the perspective of idle state parameters, so
we can observe the CPU even has enough sleeping time but it cannot run
into deepest idle state; this is very serious for some specific ducy
cycle cases.
Another issue is after tick keeping running in idle state, the tick
can heavily impact on 'menu' governor metrics, especially it will
introduce many noise for next event correction factors.
This patch series tries to fix these two issues; patch 0001 wants to
define a time point to distinguish for stopping or not, this time point
consideres the factors from tick period and the maximum target residency
and use prediction period to compare this time point to decide if need
to stop tick. Patch 0002 wants to always to give compensation for tick
event so that dimiss the tick impaction on correction factors for next
time prediction.
Blow table are comparison results for testing cases between without and
with this patch series; we run the test case with single task with period
5ms with different dutycycle, the total running time is 10s. Based on
the tracing log, we do statistics for all CPUs for all idle states
duration, the unit is second (s), on Hikey board the result shows the C2
state (the CPU deepest state) selection improvement.
Some notations are used in the table:
state: C0: WFI; C1: CPU OFF; C2: Cluster OFF
All testing cases have single task with 5ms period:
Without patches With patches Difference
----------------------------- ----------------------------- -------------------------------
Duty cycle C0 C1 C2 C0 C1 C2 C0 C1 C2
1% 0.218589 4.208460 87.995606 0.119723 0.847116 91.940569 -0.098866 -3.361344 +3.944963
3% 0.801521 5.031361 86.444753 0.147346 0.820276 91.761191 -0.654175 -4.211085 +5.316438
5% 0.590236 2.733048 88.284541 0.149237 1.042383 90.490482 -0.440999 -1.690665 +2.205941
10% 0.601922 6.282368 84.899870 0.169491 1.304985 89.725754 -0.432431 -4.977383 +4.825884
20% 1.381870 8.531687 80.627691 0.307390 3.302562 86.686887 -1.074480 -5.229125 +6.059196
30% 1.785221 6.974483 81.083312 0.548050 5.319929 83.551747 -1.237171 -1.654554 +2.468435
40% 1.403247 6.474203 80.577176 0.467686 6.366482 81.983384 -0.935561 -0.107721 +1.406208
Leo Yan (2):
cpuidle: menu: Correct the criteria for stopping tick
cpuidle: menu: Dismiss tick impaction on correction factors
drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
--
2.7.4
next reply other threads:[~2018-08-09 17:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-09 17:20 Leo Yan [this message]
2018-08-09 17:20 ` [RESEND PATCH v1 1/2] cpuidle: menu: Correct the criteria for stopping tick Leo Yan
2018-08-09 20:47 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-08-10 7:13 ` leo.yan
2018-08-10 7:22 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-08-10 8:49 ` leo.yan
2018-08-10 9:03 ` leo.yan
2018-08-12 11:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-08-12 16:07 ` leo.yan
2018-08-13 8:01 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-08-13 9:58 ` leo.yan
2018-08-09 17:20 ` [RESEND PATCH v1 2/2] cpuidle: menu: Dismiss tick impaction on correction factors Leo Yan
2018-08-09 21:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=1533835203-5789-1-git-send-email-leo.yan@linaro.org \
--to=leo.yan@linaro.org \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).