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=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,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 17494C5519F for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 10:46:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (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 96493222E9 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 10:46:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="uHEIgQ56" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 96493222E9 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From: References:To:Subject:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=/m9XZncBFcB30i4mMWTq48BZicUp4vvJe0H4CdTNMbU=; b=uHEIgQ56TsCpszoBbdZ9XZflS WzhdkSTyA5kINo+QLEkQmW08pJVv1p4HQDbR43PS1UDmBpNclc9Z4A+B2gVtf5Zi3KBD2ktCV2Mxc d7HOmkx9HqHtC9i01QjAl1HUelH3grELk/ImABHICvKA7dfRjuT68dbfOXMdm2s2QMdOEldtXMD6v W97D+yQCPXb4ZZ6zlMac0pE1H8XjLIe4JR3q9HDBH7C6uWvBX/HQltZflTTl2O9D5lXPw2DfGj/g5 QhO2F0nHdQ+r7X81n9jS379ewLUxge2TeqHdV5kxXaNNgdvZTD8iVkUR1B+D4dUhDWZPp8TcNBBHp USbB0x4+A==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1keyUd-0002sW-HA; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 10:45:47 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1keyUa-0002re-Sy for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 10:45:45 +0000 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 567D2D6E; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:45:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.57.54.66] (unknown [10.57.54.66]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 14D333F718; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:45:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] [RFC] CPUFreq: Add support for cpu-perf-dependencies To: Viresh Kumar , Lukasz Luba References: <20201102120115.29993-1-nicola.mazzucato@arm.com> <20201102120115.29993-4-nicola.mazzucato@arm.com> <20201106092020.za3oxg7gutzc3y2b@vireshk-i7> <0a334a73-45ef-58ff-7dfd-9df6f4ff290a@arm.com> <20201106105514.bhtdklyhn7goml64@vireshk-i7> <7f73bcd6-0f06-4ef0-7f02-0751e6c4d94b@arm.com> <20201109065742.22czfgyjhsjmkytf@vireshk-i7> <2fa8a5c0-f66d-34bc-7f1c-8462e7532e0a@arm.com> <20201117101128.6uapqg56arwqmm5p@vireshk-i7> From: Nicola Mazzucato Message-ID: <0858962e-3a30-d177-594b-bb8e3149dd8d@arm.com> Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 10:47:16 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201117101128.6uapqg56arwqmm5p@vireshk-i7> Content-Language: en-US X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201117_054545_018500_19579181 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 20.57 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: nm@ti.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, sboyd@kernel.org, vireshk@kernel.org, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, chris.redpath@arm.com, morten.rasmussen@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hi Viresh, On 11/17/20 10:11 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 16-11-20, 11:33, Lukasz Luba wrote: >> On 11/9/20 6:57 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: >>> On 06-11-20, 11:14, Lukasz Luba wrote: >>>> I also had similar doubts, because if we make frequency requests >>>> independently for each CPU, why not having N cooling devs, which >>>> will set independently QoS max freq for them... >>>> >>>> What convinced me: >>>> EAS and FIE would know the 'real' frequency of the cluster, IPA >>>> can use it also and have only one cooling device per cluster. >>>> >>>> We would like to keep this old style 'one cooling device per cpuset'. >>>> I don't have strong opinion and if it would appear that there are >>>> some errors in freq estimation for cluster, then maybe it does make >>>> more sense to have cdev per CPU... >>> >>> Let me rephrase my question. What is it that doesn't work _correctly_ >>> with cdev per cpufreq policy in your case? What doesn't work well if >>> the thermal stuff keeps looking at only the related_cpus thing and not >>> the cpu-perf-dependencies thing? >>> >> >> We don't have a platform which would be this per-cpu freq request, yet. >> Thus it's hard to answer your question. The EAS would work in 'old >> style' - cluster mode. I don't know how IPA would work on such HW >> and SW configuration. To figure this out I need a real platform. > > Hmm, so who are going to be the users of this new stuff (dependent > CPUs) ? In general, any platform that has hardware coordination in place and some components need to use the information. I don't think cpufreq-cooling should be updated, unless there > is a compelling reason to. > > The other one in energy model ? Why does it need this information ? The reasons has probably gone lost in the emails, but in a nutshell EM needs accurate information on performance boundaries to achieve correct task placement. > > Who else ? > Freq-invariance has been mentioned. I suppose the fix will depend on which strategy we prefer to solve this. As a reminder, two solutions: 1) dependent_cpus cpumask in cpufreq and involved entities pick this info or 2) dependent_cpus cpumask in driver but some entities' interfaces may need to change Hope it helps, Nicola _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel