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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 C29A1C433DF for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 08:45:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D5C02078D for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 08:45:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="EEQvmCMH" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727110AbgGJIpA (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jul 2020 04:45:00 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46966 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726615AbgGJIo7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jul 2020 04:44:59 -0400 Received: from mail-vs1-xe41.google.com (mail-vs1-xe41.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e41]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61F5BC08C5CE for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 01:44:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vs1-xe41.google.com with SMTP id d11so68856vsq.3 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 01:44:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=MHXlflOXGuztUVgAtLl/DuS9kIGjLj5v35ORjMrhjPE=; b=EEQvmCMHjyclSAhI44+gIuqzh+C/J5qzex5wrhW9B0YcxTb/LLpF2j1KmeCXe3r1cs sSzo+IO+LroLSEAqbmoNWnJeHHsHwKtxjXCPXTXIx/dtxX2R92YsUyhmIv9SqHInHdWN zpvdll5+a8KMZUmi4mN0LMQojweykbDStLGfxo3v1iN7LL3YxO0IfawqU4lEAtU7H0b4 qILzAEgOGEM4ndIV7zfhHvsn9H2m1aqXXJw3XF1xGsjZXyQDAo1mn6k9lTSNxFB50avF h7lL1geyw6ipxhGJV/fCtnr0uYt4rbxqEF73WVGPaCbs4q+Yr+6GXnvtXZUT4Hc30MAq ji4A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=MHXlflOXGuztUVgAtLl/DuS9kIGjLj5v35ORjMrhjPE=; b=Xw/65IaY4hzHkk78Qhu+rteqXgdBPDWfLi2xoqIDDSFMwNytv1sl196VXsiAL7OFh7 Ov/YxLf4qyHCIXdeQZwMa/0cCwKaQn6YlxyhS/UrJEa9tmmksndAafHgFi+vyqxAQV0o aL+xCZMyKkopMXg4P+3Qh8yJaZd+PnotkMfyTt6FQqfYRnHdiID1oXtZLuFR505mbWsv 7UByEgBEGU26MqlT4nYrubP/8vi0yOnGnejEj6eiiRR3eIXDeAV54HiyCQY7A+Iz9hA0 oDgDWbP69v303YWI5SB0/vtjUlsFKbtLx9ka71HUlmm7NCEO3Cnz0hmesbucSW0A3+pV mW7A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531QPZQOwoMoSXqBXpHVpSr3Slw4/QbwCTLSqKpr84wO7qc2xm/H RyOYnUsWfVZkD0yQP+rOkNeUDIpTxC/8n+DOgok= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzIYoseFJB38+HV5mT96b+B83dWVVvKzIDLfH7eNTLgMVXIfXPCAJ9zwTfECX3rxBx84h1GzMhh0nzGD75UN+4= X-Received: by 2002:a67:fa5a:: with SMTP id j26mr11750292vsq.95.1594370698604; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 01:44:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200710074143.306787-1-christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> <58ef264448eb3ea75f846513210a5430b75b44c6.camel@pengutronix.de> In-Reply-To: <58ef264448eb3ea75f846513210a5430b75b44c6.camel@pengutronix.de> From: Christian Gmeiner Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 10:44:47 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add support for GPU load values To: Lucas Stach Cc: LKML , Chris Healy , Russell King , David Airlie , Daniel Vetter , The etnaviv authors , DRI mailing list Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hoi Lucas Am Fr., 10. Juli 2020 um 10:31 Uhr schrieb Lucas Stach : > > Hi Christian, > > Am Freitag, den 10.07.2020, 09:41 +0200 schrieb Christian Gmeiner: > > This patch series add support for loadavg values for GPU > > sub-components. I am adding a SMA algorithm as I was not > > really sure if EWMA would be a good fit for this use case. > > 1 second is a pretty long window in GPU time. Why do you feel that a > simple moving average is more appropriate than a exponentially > weighted one here? Note that I haven't given this any thought myself > and haven't made up my mind yet, so this is a honest question to > understand the reasoning behind your choice. > I played with both variants but I 'feel' that SMA might be a better fit. To be honest I have no background in signal processing and stuff like this so.. I will go the route you guide me to :) I have kept the "interface" for SMA equal to the one EWMA uses so I can easily switch between them. -- greets -- Christian Gmeiner, MSc https://christian-gmeiner.info/privacypolicy 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=-0.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED 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 55A19C433E0 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 08:45:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2759E2078D for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 08:45:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="EEQvmCMH" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2759E2078D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51ABF6EBA3; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 08:45:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vs1-xe44.google.com (mail-vs1-xe44.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e44]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 717B86EB9B; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 08:44:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vs1-xe44.google.com with SMTP id b77so2566134vsd.8; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 01:44:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=MHXlflOXGuztUVgAtLl/DuS9kIGjLj5v35ORjMrhjPE=; b=EEQvmCMHjyclSAhI44+gIuqzh+C/J5qzex5wrhW9B0YcxTb/LLpF2j1KmeCXe3r1cs sSzo+IO+LroLSEAqbmoNWnJeHHsHwKtxjXCPXTXIx/dtxX2R92YsUyhmIv9SqHInHdWN zpvdll5+a8KMZUmi4mN0LMQojweykbDStLGfxo3v1iN7LL3YxO0IfawqU4lEAtU7H0b4 qILzAEgOGEM4ndIV7zfhHvsn9H2m1aqXXJw3XF1xGsjZXyQDAo1mn6k9lTSNxFB50avF h7lL1geyw6ipxhGJV/fCtnr0uYt4rbxqEF73WVGPaCbs4q+Yr+6GXnvtXZUT4Hc30MAq ji4A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=MHXlflOXGuztUVgAtLl/DuS9kIGjLj5v35ORjMrhjPE=; b=G/Mnw8H/8jbS2SX0NBItrcS4RN0+XuAPB8lekEDlvYh6/BP5yKfTrEQ6BdZ9BfQ/wR fU0kwCbikgX98szSRoq5eKdl0t+R6e7ayY247jYriudsQJk4ITUFM8usQZpG9OR9Qw2U mFkGSNWFBkD2C99jZ4JLhGqMEiYifDhlLeHaZELUK4x0Iyz97fnlaB4pjIWoc0xXRGGd 5jX9ovGQJleiLLjz9qVJSZDW6vc3ZHzmOx5IPjNXGWZ9E05H7C6Hn5eD43MypUG867Gm pBWRw2hDemKReBLkllHRYzb2NoyISymTH9WUcOCi+58hXOwqbDcLTn2PoIcPa6vkvH4R CaEw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530ms8Wb76AjaatZLQ8wl9mhz5uv1UP92DBhLbP+e1QMS5+WkKa2 jgJDgXCERwHb0euzdWsgMzBYUOIKxUZS2iGMidaav5MVMu4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzIYoseFJB38+HV5mT96b+B83dWVVvKzIDLfH7eNTLgMVXIfXPCAJ9zwTfECX3rxBx84h1GzMhh0nzGD75UN+4= X-Received: by 2002:a67:fa5a:: with SMTP id j26mr11750292vsq.95.1594370698604; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 01:44:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200710074143.306787-1-christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> <58ef264448eb3ea75f846513210a5430b75b44c6.camel@pengutronix.de> In-Reply-To: <58ef264448eb3ea75f846513210a5430b75b44c6.camel@pengutronix.de> From: Christian Gmeiner Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 10:44:47 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add support for GPU load values To: Lucas Stach X-BeenThere: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Direct Rendering Infrastructure - Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: David Airlie , The etnaviv authors , DRI mailing list , LKML , Russell King , Chris Healy Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "dri-devel" Hoi Lucas Am Fr., 10. Juli 2020 um 10:31 Uhr schrieb Lucas Stach : > > Hi Christian, > > Am Freitag, den 10.07.2020, 09:41 +0200 schrieb Christian Gmeiner: > > This patch series add support for loadavg values for GPU > > sub-components. I am adding a SMA algorithm as I was not > > really sure if EWMA would be a good fit for this use case. > > 1 second is a pretty long window in GPU time. Why do you feel that a > simple moving average is more appropriate than a exponentially > weighted one here? Note that I haven't given this any thought myself > and haven't made up my mind yet, so this is a honest question to > understand the reasoning behind your choice. > I played with both variants but I 'feel' that SMA might be a better fit. To be honest I have no background in signal processing and stuff like this so.. I will go the route you guide me to :) I have kept the "interface" for SMA equal to the one EWMA uses so I can easily switch between them. -- greets -- Christian Gmeiner, MSc https://christian-gmeiner.info/privacypolicy _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel