From: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@arm.com> To: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, sumitg@nvidia.com, sudeep.holla@arm.covm, will@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, rafael@kernel.org, yang@os.amperecomputing.com, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] arm64: Provide an AMU-based version of arch_freq_get_on_cpu Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 10:20:34 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <Zbyz4mQHLI9aPK6e@e129154.nice.arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <ZWYDr6JJJzBvsqf0@arm.com> On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 03:13:51PM +0000, Ionela Voinescu wrote: > Hi Beata, > > On Monday 27 Nov 2023 at 16:08:37 (+0000), Beata Michalska wrote: > > With the Frequency Invariance Engine (FIE) being already wired up with > > sched tick and making use of relevant (core counter and constant > > counter) AMU counters, getting the current frequency for a given CPU > > on supported platforms, can be achieved by utilizing the frequency scale > > factor which reflects an average CPU frequency for the last tick period > > length. > > > > Suggested-by: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com> > > Signed-off-by: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@arm.com> > > Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> > > --- > > > > Notes: > > Due to [1], if merged, there might be a need to modify the patch to > > accommodate changes [1] introduces: > > > > freq = cpufreq_get_hw_max_freq(cpu) >> SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT > > to > > freq = per_cpu(capacity_freq_ref, cpu); >> SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT > > [1] > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20231121154349.GA1938@willie-the-truck/T/#mcb018d076dbce6f60ed2779634a9b6ffe622641e > > > > arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c > > index 615c1a20129f..ae2445f6e7da 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c > > @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ > > #include <linux/cpufreq.h> > > #include <linux/init.h> > > #include <linux/percpu.h> > > +#include <linux/sched/isolation.h> > > > > #include <asm/cpu.h> > > #include <asm/cputype.h> > > @@ -186,6 +187,44 @@ static void amu_scale_freq_tick(void) > > this_cpu_write(arch_freq_scale, (unsigned long)scale); > > } > > > > +unsigned int arch_freq_get_on_cpu(int cpu) > > +{ > > + unsigned int freq; > > + u64 scale; > > + > > + if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, amu_fie_cpus)) > > + return 0; > > + > > + /* > > + * For those CPUs that are in full dynticks mode, try an alternative > > + * source for the counters (and thus freq scale), > > + * if available for given policy > > + */ > > + if (!housekeeping_cpu(cpu, HK_TYPE_TICK)) { > > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu); > > + int ref_cpu = nr_cpu_ids; > > + > > + if (cpumask_intersects(housekeeping_cpumask(HK_TYPE_TICK), > > + policy->cpus)) > > + ref_cpu = cpumask_nth_and(cpu, policy->cpus, > > + housekeeping_cpumask(HK_TYPE_TICK)); > > + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); > > + if (ref_cpu >= nr_cpu_ids) > > + return 0; > > + cpu = ref_cpu; > > + } > > + > > + /* > > + * Reversed computation to the one used to determine > > + * the arch_freq_scale value > > + * (see amu_scale_freq_tick for details) > > + */ > > + scale = per_cpu(arch_freq_scale, cpu); > > Any reason for not using arch_scale_freq_capacity() here? > > To me it seems a bit nicer to use the "official" function to return the > frequency scale factor. > Noted. > > + freq = cpufreq_get_hw_max_freq(cpu) >> SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT; > > Given Vincent's patch at [1] I think here might be best to call > arch_scale_freq_ref() instead. That's because the frequency scale factor > will use that frequency as the maximum frequency in its calculations and > we'd not want to use a different one here. > OK. > The annoyance is coping with capacity_freq_ref not having been set > yet, and that would be easy if capacity_freq_ref was initialized to 0. > Luckily with Vincent's changes it can now be 0. I'll comments on his > patches and ask him to make this change. > > So I think you can safely use arch_scale_freq_ref() here. If > arch_scale_freq_ref() returns 0, arch_freq_get_on_cpu() will just return > 0 as well. > Will do. > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231109101438.1139696-8-vincent.guittot@linaro.org/ > > > + freq *= scale; > > In some scenarios the frequencies visible to cpufreq might not look like > actual frequencies, but some scaled abstract performance values. One > example is cppc_cpufreq when one does not provide the optional frequency > information in the CPC objects but just the performance information. > > Therefore the maximum frequency seen here can be quite a small value, so > it might be best to do the multiplication first and the shift after that. > Right, that was in v1! Must have mixed up things ending with stale data. Will address that in the next version - if one is out. --- BR Beata > Thanks, > Ionela. > > > + return freq; > > +} > > + > > static struct scale_freq_data amu_sfd = { > > .source = SCALE_FREQ_SOURCE_ARCH, > > .set_freq_scale = amu_scale_freq_tick, > > -- > > 2.25.1 > >
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@arm.com> To: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, sumitg@nvidia.com, sudeep.holla@arm.covm, will@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, rafael@kernel.org, yang@os.amperecomputing.com, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] arm64: Provide an AMU-based version of arch_freq_get_on_cpu Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 10:20:34 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <Zbyz4mQHLI9aPK6e@e129154.nice.arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <ZWYDr6JJJzBvsqf0@arm.com> On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 03:13:51PM +0000, Ionela Voinescu wrote: > Hi Beata, > > On Monday 27 Nov 2023 at 16:08:37 (+0000), Beata Michalska wrote: > > With the Frequency Invariance Engine (FIE) being already wired up with > > sched tick and making use of relevant (core counter and constant > > counter) AMU counters, getting the current frequency for a given CPU > > on supported platforms, can be achieved by utilizing the frequency scale > > factor which reflects an average CPU frequency for the last tick period > > length. > > > > Suggested-by: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com> > > Signed-off-by: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@arm.com> > > Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> > > --- > > > > Notes: > > Due to [1], if merged, there might be a need to modify the patch to > > accommodate changes [1] introduces: > > > > freq = cpufreq_get_hw_max_freq(cpu) >> SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT > > to > > freq = per_cpu(capacity_freq_ref, cpu); >> SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT > > [1] > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20231121154349.GA1938@willie-the-truck/T/#mcb018d076dbce6f60ed2779634a9b6ffe622641e > > > > arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c > > index 615c1a20129f..ae2445f6e7da 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c > > @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ > > #include <linux/cpufreq.h> > > #include <linux/init.h> > > #include <linux/percpu.h> > > +#include <linux/sched/isolation.h> > > > > #include <asm/cpu.h> > > #include <asm/cputype.h> > > @@ -186,6 +187,44 @@ static void amu_scale_freq_tick(void) > > this_cpu_write(arch_freq_scale, (unsigned long)scale); > > } > > > > +unsigned int arch_freq_get_on_cpu(int cpu) > > +{ > > + unsigned int freq; > > + u64 scale; > > + > > + if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, amu_fie_cpus)) > > + return 0; > > + > > + /* > > + * For those CPUs that are in full dynticks mode, try an alternative > > + * source for the counters (and thus freq scale), > > + * if available for given policy > > + */ > > + if (!housekeeping_cpu(cpu, HK_TYPE_TICK)) { > > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu); > > + int ref_cpu = nr_cpu_ids; > > + > > + if (cpumask_intersects(housekeeping_cpumask(HK_TYPE_TICK), > > + policy->cpus)) > > + ref_cpu = cpumask_nth_and(cpu, policy->cpus, > > + housekeeping_cpumask(HK_TYPE_TICK)); > > + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); > > + if (ref_cpu >= nr_cpu_ids) > > + return 0; > > + cpu = ref_cpu; > > + } > > + > > + /* > > + * Reversed computation to the one used to determine > > + * the arch_freq_scale value > > + * (see amu_scale_freq_tick for details) > > + */ > > + scale = per_cpu(arch_freq_scale, cpu); > > Any reason for not using arch_scale_freq_capacity() here? > > To me it seems a bit nicer to use the "official" function to return the > frequency scale factor. > Noted. > > + freq = cpufreq_get_hw_max_freq(cpu) >> SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT; > > Given Vincent's patch at [1] I think here might be best to call > arch_scale_freq_ref() instead. That's because the frequency scale factor > will use that frequency as the maximum frequency in its calculations and > we'd not want to use a different one here. > OK. > The annoyance is coping with capacity_freq_ref not having been set > yet, and that would be easy if capacity_freq_ref was initialized to 0. > Luckily with Vincent's changes it can now be 0. I'll comments on his > patches and ask him to make this change. > > So I think you can safely use arch_scale_freq_ref() here. If > arch_scale_freq_ref() returns 0, arch_freq_get_on_cpu() will just return > 0 as well. > Will do. > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231109101438.1139696-8-vincent.guittot@linaro.org/ > > > + freq *= scale; > > In some scenarios the frequencies visible to cpufreq might not look like > actual frequencies, but some scaled abstract performance values. One > example is cppc_cpufreq when one does not provide the optional frequency > information in the CPC objects but just the performance information. > > Therefore the maximum frequency seen here can be quite a small value, so > it might be best to do the multiplication first and the shift after that. > Right, that was in v1! Must have mixed up things ending with stale data. Will address that in the next version - if one is out. --- BR Beata > Thanks, > Ionela. > > > + return freq; > > +} > > + > > static struct scale_freq_data amu_sfd = { > > .source = SCALE_FREQ_SOURCE_ARCH, > > .set_freq_scale = amu_scale_freq_tick, > > -- > > 2.25.1 > > _______________________________________________ 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:[~2024-02-02 9:21 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-11-27 16:08 [PATCH v2 0/2] Add support for AArch64 AMUv1-based arch_freq_get_on_cpu Beata Michalska 2023-11-27 16:08 ` Beata Michalska 2023-11-27 16:08 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] arm64: Provide an AMU-based version of arch_freq_get_on_cpu Beata Michalska 2023-11-27 16:08 ` Beata Michalska 2023-11-28 15:13 ` Ionela Voinescu 2023-11-28 15:13 ` Ionela Voinescu 2024-02-02 9:20 ` Beata Michalska [this message] 2024-02-02 9:20 ` Beata Michalska 2024-02-22 19:55 ` Vanshidhar Konda 2024-02-22 19:55 ` Vanshidhar Konda 2023-11-27 16:08 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] cpufreq: Wire-up arch-flavored freq info into cpufreq_verify_current_freq Beata Michalska 2023-11-27 16:08 ` Beata Michalska 2023-11-28 14:01 ` Ionela Voinescu 2023-11-28 14:01 ` Ionela Voinescu 2023-12-01 13:02 ` Sumit Gupta 2023-12-01 13:02 ` Sumit Gupta 2023-12-05 11:05 ` Ionela Voinescu 2023-12-05 11:05 ` Ionela Voinescu 2023-12-06 13:28 ` Sumit Gupta 2023-12-06 13:28 ` Sumit Gupta 2023-12-07 9:22 ` Ionela Voinescu 2023-12-07 9:22 ` Ionela Voinescu 2023-12-08 15:34 ` Sumit Gupta 2023-12-08 15:34 ` Sumit Gupta 2024-02-02 9:14 ` Beata Michalska 2024-02-02 9:14 ` Beata Michalska 2023-12-06 20:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2023-12-06 20:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2024-02-02 9:05 ` Beata Michalska 2024-02-02 9:05 ` Beata Michalska
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=Zbyz4mQHLI9aPK6e@e129154.nice.arm.com \ --to=beata.michalska@arm.com \ --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \ --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=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=rafael@kernel.org \ --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \ --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.covm \ --cc=sumitg@nvidia.com \ --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \ --cc=will@kernel.org \ --cc=yang@os.amperecomputing.com \ /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.