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=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 E0083C388F7 for ; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 12:07:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82389223FB for ; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 12:07:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1603368473; bh=rsWpUgmKiK1iTffkYnIeKuIs/1+05Y0WxWiqciGePpU=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:List-ID:From; b=LuERgCdAxBNdzcq3DTJEkrQVNDuKX6Pw+gy3kjPetYsPJ6X/i/eUAhUqiH0EZoong M6YjTcrsDg2KASNSpNTrvDSuLPdulqTgeOJJO/A9E210om3M+hP14uqRlpGXKDUlfE G2e5oLKQEjDGsuqQQvzxl09Yccf83NC6bbVl2zkM= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2897868AbgJVMHw (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Oct 2020 08:07:52 -0400 Received: from mail-oi1-f195.google.com ([209.85.167.195]:42088 "EHLO mail-oi1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2897863AbgJVMHu (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Oct 2020 08:07:50 -0400 Received: by mail-oi1-f195.google.com with SMTP id 16so1432072oix.9; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 05:07:49 -0700 (PDT) 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=rsWpUgmKiK1iTffkYnIeKuIs/1+05Y0WxWiqciGePpU=; b=q9uE8/FeCFyEpVUfe8sbIMZKDd72yw/qFdOzyBpPpkj5yrHHtOusGJXTY4nlXihPYH 2KIBlWkFP5QpeqN9hwuJb8QB1i5NqP6cHWlxTHhb/M/dZ2kc5swKln1ExlTSC/ZVT774 qhPGsQc3xJcaH0ev4N05cj+qnVjQiMPeqCzMzlbzbZ1HeF10LkmSSIb8yLi2Lc2wjsxr 1MQC87gsBQTckjW72FAkGiJX0o4n4kK/Sva+iAe4EIdyyGzLvQ8ECm/1UEmWglUvBjSB OfAxfUDtJOHxIrLkwBcEEPM/3FxWvkX3MlmlirguTb/up4K1NsY7IwoUk6OZnr7Wlr4I CyZg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530Sw2H90iEtO7tibbND6PkmAikXw/leSviRx+caciI7GVXnTHze q68AVhjw/4AavUUsTIW0o3NALq+xDOFBXaYtISg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwYKUSR87064DuZyOBUHttXjyy/bJD6aPomrsK++Z1bvXnvv86RsKwSzLufomfAgxgNxXJ4r4Dla2wRN25orNs= X-Received: by 2002:aca:fd52:: with SMTP id b79mr1327660oii.69.1603368469292; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 05:07:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200716115605.GR10769@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20201022083255.37xl3lffwk5qo6uk@vireshk-i7> <20201022090523.GV2628@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20201022110656.gaphjv2tzhj4f5y6@vireshk-i7> <20201022115752.GF2611@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> In-Reply-To: <20201022115752.GF2611@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:07:38 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] thermal: cpufreq_cooling: Reuse effective_cpu_util() To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar , Ingo Molnar , Vincent Guittot , Zhang Rui , Daniel Lezcano , Amit Daniel Kachhap , Javi Merino , Amit Kucheria , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Quentin Perret , Rafael Wysocki , Linux PM , Lukasz Luba Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 1:58 PM Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 01:30:01PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > Many people use intel_pstate in the active mode with HWP enabled too. > > We now have HWP-passive supported, afaict. So we should discourage that. Which is kind of hard, because plain HWP does better in some cases, especially performance-focused. I am still not sure why this is the case given how the passive mode with HWP enabled is implemented, but that's what Srinivas sees in his tests. > That is; I'll care less and less about people not using schedutil as > time goes on. > > > Arguably, that doesn't need to compute the effective utilization, so I > > guess it is not relevant for the discussion here, but it is not > > negligible in general. > > Why not? cpufreq-cooling should still be able to throttle the system by > setting HWP.Highest_Performance no? Well, in theory, but it is not used on x86 AFAICS. > In which case it still needs an energy estimate.