From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83003C46475 for ; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 05:59:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 345F320671 for ; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 05:59:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="diNn5scx"; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="diNn5scx" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 345F320671 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727579AbeJWOVi (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2018 10:21:38 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:57808 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726764AbeJWOVi (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2018 10:21:38 -0400 Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DDA3860CEC; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 05:59:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1540274384; bh=ah3AYubnT7CWj12YwSCCCanSszEDXUFxDQJBseUvbNA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=diNn5scxWI2i3cG/Ua8fAUj2DqbgRAJDlIAPSPKqtH33s0EiSzDXkIBMIHDHQ+Uh2 G+f3uMIWsMen9bKbhatC9IZm9hhcxIeathy/A/8N+jXCPoD7a1G30D3tR1iqYM/GEb 7Pi2mz+3r3iqEO2dAnRPOkN0lMlJWC9jISXIuCb8= Received: from codeaurora.org (blr-c-bdr-fw-01_globalnat_allzones-outside.qualcomm.com [103.229.19.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: pkondeti@smtp.codeaurora.org) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AC27C60C1B; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 05:59:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1540274384; bh=ah3AYubnT7CWj12YwSCCCanSszEDXUFxDQJBseUvbNA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=diNn5scxWI2i3cG/Ua8fAUj2DqbgRAJDlIAPSPKqtH33s0EiSzDXkIBMIHDHQ+Uh2 G+f3uMIWsMen9bKbhatC9IZm9hhcxIeathy/A/8N+jXCPoD7a1G30D3tR1iqYM/GEb 7Pi2mz+3r3iqEO2dAnRPOkN0lMlJWC9jISXIuCb8= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org AC27C60C1B Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=pkondeti@codeaurora.org Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 11:29:37 +0530 From: Pavan Kondeti To: Vincent Guittot Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com, patrick.bellasi@arm.com, pjt@google.com, bsegall@google.com, thara.gopinath@linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] sched/fair: update scale invariance of PELT Message-ID: <20181023055937.GC27587@codeaurora.org> References: <1539965871-22410-1-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> <1539965871-22410-3-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1539965871-22410-3-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Vincent, On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 06:17:51PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote: > > /* > + * The clock_pelt scales the time to reflect the effective amount of > + * computation done during the running delta time but then sync back to > + * clock_task when rq is idle. > + * > + * > + * absolute time | 1| 2| 3| 4| 5| 6| 7| 8| 9|10|11|12|13|14|15|16 > + * @ max capacity ------******---------------******--------------- > + * @ half capacity ------************---------************--------- > + * clock pelt | 1| 2| 3| 4| 7| 8| 9| 10| 11|14|15|16 > + * > + */ > +void update_rq_clock_pelt(struct rq *rq, s64 delta) > +{ > + > + if (is_idle_task(rq->curr)) { > + u32 divider = (LOAD_AVG_MAX - 1024 + rq->cfs.avg.period_contrib) << SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT; > + u32 overload = rq->cfs.avg.util_sum + LOAD_AVG_MAX; > + overload += rq->avg_rt.util_sum; > + overload += rq->avg_dl.util_sum; > + > + /* > + * Reflecting some stolen time makes sense only if the idle > + * phase would be present at max capacity. As soon as the > + * utilization of a rq has reached the maximum value, it is > + * considered as an always runnnig rq without idle time to > + * steal. This potential idle time is considered as lost in > + * this case. We keep track of this lost idle time compare to > + * rq's clock_task. > + */ > + if (overload >= divider) > + rq->lost_idle_time += rq_clock_task(rq) - rq->clock_pelt; > + I am trying to understand this better. I believe we run into this scenario, when the frequency is limited due to thermal/userspace constraints. Lets say frequency is limited to Fmax/2. A 50% task at Fmax, becomes 100% running at Fmax/2. The utilization is built up to 100% after several periods. The clock_pelt runs at 1/2 speed of the clock_task. We are loosing the idle time all along. What happens when the CPU enters idle for a short duration and comes back to run this 100% utilization task? If the above block is not present i.e lost_idle_time is not tracked, we stretch the idle time (since clock_pelt is synced to clock_task) and the utilization is dropped. Right? With the above block, we don't stretch the idle time. In fact we don't consider the idle time at all. Because, idle_time = now - last_time; idle_time = (rq->clock_pelt - rq->lost_idle_time) - last_time idle_time = (rq->clock_task - rq_clock_task + rq->clock_pelt_old) - last_time idle_time = rq->clock_pelt_old - last_time The last time is nothing but the last snapshot of the rq->clock_pelt when the task entered sleep due to which CPU entered idle. Can you please explain the significance of the above block with an example? > + > + /* The rq is idle, we can sync to clock_task */ > + rq->clock_pelt = rq_clock_task(rq); > + > + > + } else { > + /* > + * When a rq runs at a lower compute capacity, it will need > + * more time to do the same amount of work than at max > + * capacity: either because it takes more time to compute the > + * same amount of work or because taking more time means > + * sharing more often the CPU between entities. > + * In order to be invariant, we scale the delta to reflect how > + * much work has been really done. > + * Running at lower capacity also means running longer to do > + * the same amount of work and this results in stealing some > + * idle time that will disturb the load signal compared to > + * max capacity; This stolen idle time will be automaticcally > + * reflected when the rq will be idle and the clock will be > + * synced with rq_clock_task. > + */ > + > + /* > + * scale the elapsed time to reflect the real amount of > + * computation > + */ > + delta = cap_scale(delta, arch_scale_freq_capacity(cpu_of(rq))); > + delta = cap_scale(delta, arch_scale_cpu_capacity(NULL, cpu_of(rq))); > + > + rq->clock_pelt += delta; AFAICT, the rq->clock_pelt is used for both utilization and load. So the load also becomes a function of CPU uarch now. Is this intentional? 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.