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=-5.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 2DFD1C48BE6 for ; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 20:22:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15C3E60FF4 for ; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 20:22:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233390AbhFPUY4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jun 2021 16:24:56 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:44864 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233355AbhFPUYx (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jun 2021 16:24:53 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2125D113E; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 13:22:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.57.9.31] (unknown [10.57.9.31]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A493A3F70D; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 13:22:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] sched/fair: Take thermal pressure into account while estimating energy To: Vincent Guittot Cc: Dietmar Eggemann , linux-kernel , "open list:THERMAL" , Peter Zijlstra , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar , Quentin Perret , Vincent Donnefort , Beata Michalska , Ingo Molnar , Juri Lelli , Steven Rostedt , segall@google.com, Mel Gorman , Daniel Bristot de Oliveira , Thara Gopinath , Amit Kachhap , Amit Kucheria , Zhang Rui , Daniel Lezcano References: <20210614185815.15136-1-lukasz.luba@arm.com> <20210614191128.22735-1-lukasz.luba@arm.com> <237ef538-c8ca-a103-b2cc-240fc70298fe@arm.com> <9821712d-be27-a2e7-991c-b0010e23fa70@arm.com> From: Lukasz Luba Message-ID: <79dbb2ad-88c1-ff08-59c8-7728d37ee78a@arm.com> Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 21:22:40 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 6/16/21 8:25 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote: > On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 at 19:24, Dietmar Eggemann wrote: >> >> On 15/06/2021 18:09, Lukasz Luba wrote: >>> >>> On 6/15/21 4:31 PM, Dietmar Eggemann wrote: >>>> On 14/06/2021 21:11, Lukasz Luba wrote: >> >> [...] >> >>>> It's important to highlight that this will only fix this issue between >>>> schedutil and EAS when it's due to `thermal pressure` (today only via >>>> CPU cooling). There are other places which could restrict policy->max >>>> via freq_qos_update_request() and EAS will be unaware of it. >>> >>> True, but for this I have some other plans. >> >> As long as people are aware of the fact that this was developed to be >> beneficial for `EAS - IPA` integration, I'm fine with this. > > I don't think it's only for EAS - IPA. Thermal_pressure can be used by > HW throttling like here: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/6/8/1791 > > EAS is involved but not IPA Thank you Vincent for pointing to Thara's patches. Indeed, this is a good example. We will have to provide similar for our SCMI perf notifications - these are the plans that I've mentioned. In both new examples, the IPA (or other governors) won't be even involved.