From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Cc: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>,
Douglas Raillard <douglas.raillard@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
mingo@redhat.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, viresh.kumar@linaro.org,
juri.lelli@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
qperret@qperret.net, patrick.bellasi@matbug.net,
dh.han@samsung.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 0/6] sched/cpufreq: Make schedutil energy aware
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 10:11:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191018081153.GE2328@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2cbde0fe-c10c-0ebb-32ef-2d522986bc89@arm.com>
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 09:44:44AM +0200, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 17/10/2019 16:11, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:11:16PM +0100, Quentin Perret wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > It only boosts when 'rq->cfs.avg.util' increases while
> > 'rq->cfs.avg.util_est.enqueued' remains unchanged (and util > util_est
> > obv).
> >
> > This condition can be true for select_task_rq_fair(), because that is
> > ran before we do enqueue_task_fair() (for obvious raisins).
> >
> >>> I'm still thinking about the exact means you're using to raise C; that
> >>> is, the 'util - util_est' as cost_margin. It hurts my brain still.
> >>
> >> +1 ...
> >
> > cost_i = capacity_i / power_i ; for the i-th OPP
>
> I get confused by this definition. efficiency=capacity/power but the
> cs->cost value used in em_pd_get_higher_freq() is defined as
>
> cs_cost = cs->power * cpu_max_freq / cs->freq [energy_model.h]
cost_i = power_i * f_max / f_i
cost(x) = cost_j * (1 + x) ; f_j >= min_freq
cost_k <= cost(x)
P = C*V^2*f, V ~ f -> P ~ f^3
cost_i ~ f_i^3 * f_max / f_i
= f_i^2 * f_max
cost(x) = (1 + x) * f_j^2 * f_max
cost_k = cost(x)
f_k^2 * f_max = (1 + x) * f_j^2 * f_max
f_k = sqrt(1 + x) * f_j
Which does indeed make more sense... However, I still struggle with
using our 'x = util - util_est' as input for an OPP specific increase.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-18 8:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-11 13:44 [RFC PATCH v3 0/6] sched/cpufreq: Make schedutil energy aware Douglas RAILLARD
2019-10-11 13:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 1/6] PM: Introduce em_pd_get_higher_freq() Douglas RAILLARD
2019-10-17 8:57 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-10-17 9:58 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-10-17 11:09 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-11 13:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 2/6] sched/cpufreq: Attach perf domain to sugov policy Douglas RAILLARD
2019-10-17 8:57 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-10-17 10:22 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-11 13:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 3/6] sched/cpufreq: Hook em_pd_get_higher_power() into get_next_freq() Douglas RAILLARD
2019-10-11 13:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 4/6] sched/cpufreq: Introduce sugov_cpu_ramp_boost Douglas RAILLARD
2019-10-14 14:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-14 15:32 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-17 8:57 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-10-17 11:19 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-11 13:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 5/6] sched/cpufreq: Boost schedutil frequency ramp up Douglas RAILLARD
2019-10-17 9:21 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-10-11 13:45 ` [RFC PATCH v3 6/6] sched/cpufreq: Add schedutil_em_tp tracepoint Douglas RAILLARD
2019-10-14 14:53 ` [RFC PATCH v3 0/6] sched/cpufreq: Make schedutil energy aware Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-14 15:50 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-17 9:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-17 11:11 ` Quentin Perret
2019-10-17 14:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-18 7:44 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-10-18 7:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-18 17:24 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-18 8:11 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2019-10-17 14:23 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-17 14:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-17 19:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-18 11:46 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-18 12:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-18 14:44 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-18 15:15 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-10-18 16:03 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-18 15:20 ` Vincent Guittot
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=20191018081153.GE2328@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=dh.han@samsung.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=douglas.raillard@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=patrick.bellasi@matbug.net \
--cc=qperret@google.com \
--cc=qperret@qperret.net \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.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: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).