From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> To: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com> Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] topology: Allow multiple entities to provide sched_freq_tick() callback Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2021 09:55:58 +0530 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20210217042558.o4anjdkayzgqny55@vireshk-i7> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210217002422.GA17422@arm.com> On 17-02-21, 00:24, Ionela Voinescu wrote: > I think it could be merged in patch 1/2 as it's part of enabling the use > of multiple sources of information for FIE. Up to you! Sure. > > static void amu_fie_setup(const struct cpumask *cpus) > > { > > - bool invariant; > > int cpu; > > > > /* We are already set since the last insmod of cpufreq driver */ > > @@ -257,25 +256,10 @@ static void amu_fie_setup(const struct cpumask *cpus) > > > > cpumask_or(amu_fie_cpus, amu_fie_cpus, cpus); > > > > - invariant = topology_scale_freq_invariant(); > > - > > - /* We aren't fully invariant yet */ > > - if (!invariant && !cpumask_equal(amu_fie_cpus, cpu_present_mask)) > > - return; > > - > > You still need these checks, otherwise you could end up with only part > of the CPUs setting a scale factor, when only part of the CPUs support > AMUs and there is no cpufreq support for FIE. Both supports_scale_freq_counters() and topology_scale_freq_invariant() take care of this now and they will keep reporting the system as invariant until the time all the CPUs have counters (in absence of cpufreq). The topology_set_scale_freq_source() API is supposed to be called multiple times, probably once for each policy and so I don't see a need of these checks anymore. > Small(ish) optimisation at the beginning of this function: > > if (cpumask_empty(&scale_freq_counters_mask)) > scale_freq_invariant = topology_scale_freq_invariant(); > > This will save you a call to rebuild_sched_domains_energy(), which is > quite expensive, when cpufreq supports FIE and we also have counters. Good Point. > After comments addressed, > > Reviewed-by: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com> Thanks. > Tested-by: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com> Just out of curiosity, what exactly did you test and what was the setup ? :) -- viresh
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> To: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] topology: Allow multiple entities to provide sched_freq_tick() callback Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2021 09:55:58 +0530 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20210217042558.o4anjdkayzgqny55@vireshk-i7> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210217002422.GA17422@arm.com> On 17-02-21, 00:24, Ionela Voinescu wrote: > I think it could be merged in patch 1/2 as it's part of enabling the use > of multiple sources of information for FIE. Up to you! Sure. > > static void amu_fie_setup(const struct cpumask *cpus) > > { > > - bool invariant; > > int cpu; > > > > /* We are already set since the last insmod of cpufreq driver */ > > @@ -257,25 +256,10 @@ static void amu_fie_setup(const struct cpumask *cpus) > > > > cpumask_or(amu_fie_cpus, amu_fie_cpus, cpus); > > > > - invariant = topology_scale_freq_invariant(); > > - > > - /* We aren't fully invariant yet */ > > - if (!invariant && !cpumask_equal(amu_fie_cpus, cpu_present_mask)) > > - return; > > - > > You still need these checks, otherwise you could end up with only part > of the CPUs setting a scale factor, when only part of the CPUs support > AMUs and there is no cpufreq support for FIE. Both supports_scale_freq_counters() and topology_scale_freq_invariant() take care of this now and they will keep reporting the system as invariant until the time all the CPUs have counters (in absence of cpufreq). The topology_set_scale_freq_source() API is supposed to be called multiple times, probably once for each policy and so I don't see a need of these checks anymore. > Small(ish) optimisation at the beginning of this function: > > if (cpumask_empty(&scale_freq_counters_mask)) > scale_freq_invariant = topology_scale_freq_invariant(); > > This will save you a call to rebuild_sched_domains_energy(), which is > quite expensive, when cpufreq supports FIE and we also have counters. Good Point. > After comments addressed, > > Reviewed-by: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com> Thanks. > Tested-by: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com> Just out of curiosity, what exactly did you test and what was the setup ? :) -- viresh _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-17 4:34 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-01-28 10:48 [PATCH V3 0/2] cpufreq: cppc: Add support for frequency invariance Viresh Kumar 2021-01-28 10:48 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-01-28 10:48 ` [PATCH V3 1/2] topology: Allow multiple entities to provide sched_freq_tick() callback Viresh Kumar 2021-01-28 10:48 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-02-03 11:45 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-03 11:45 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-05 9:14 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-02-05 9:14 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-02-17 0:24 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-17 0:24 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-17 4:25 ` Viresh Kumar [this message] 2021-02-17 4:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-02-17 11:30 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-17 11:30 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-17 11:40 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-02-17 11:40 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-02-17 11:57 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-17 11:57 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-18 7:23 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-02-18 7:23 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-02-18 9:33 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-02-18 9:33 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-02-18 16:36 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-18 16:36 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-19 4:58 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-02-19 4:58 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-02-19 9:44 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-19 9:44 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-19 9:48 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-02-19 9:48 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-01-28 10:48 ` [PATCH V3 2/2] cpufreq: cppc: Add support for frequency invariance Viresh Kumar 2021-01-28 10:48 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-02-18 16:35 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-18 16:35 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-22 11:00 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-22 11:00 ` Ionela Voinescu 2021-02-22 11:04 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-02-22 11:04 ` Viresh Kumar
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=20210217042558.o4anjdkayzgqny55@vireshk-i7 \ --to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \ --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \ --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \ --cc=ionela.voinescu@arm.com \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \ --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \ --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \ --cc=will@kernel.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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.