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=-6.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 021D1C433E0 for ; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 12:07:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4BFF20CC7 for ; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 12:07:00 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1593000420; bh=DelhQOfEurrxPvXb+ZVq9Hz9ysbh4ZnDAcJ9Lv18tFE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=YifBdw4+Jq53VCVq4z+j18FPod6NQjN6XBDbZYSmNEhuJAVadNy5Q1cUAk1azxTDA 5bZxbmDRioH49TTCNHpaEFrgs3iRqSO1e47A05Zhr3BXC4qqghN4wOZ2ptaLX1gFjK ffcrWNV6e1wUKWClU9YDC6JYOPbrBCnINX4tTsPg= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388694AbgFXMHA convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2020 08:07:00 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-f44.google.com ([209.85.218.44]:34566 "EHLO mail-ej1-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388522AbgFXMG7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2020 08:06:59 -0400 Received: by mail-ej1-f44.google.com with SMTP id y10so2221689eje.1; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 05:06:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=DIWUKwC5j7zR6xCRsdwY2boMvp3E8i9Nf4eBjr5JHPY=; b=VyzvRJ92l84AlOQmqf/tStZfCbdlYQGJJPXdEeyJV6q+spGaEYp9D1zfig7MIwtOrW kkEYSiCbH+7h/Om4mG1ql4HOmqCjkf1eP78IfU8IGvBtQZZ4KBs9hIbdXXVO1b4cqPpk Bh1YDptkRZSjeTITcF53u4BCrDHlKnJkNuqdyD2308rlk4nEDj7qzN1ESVO7XJY3k/zU WPCFC5A9h4+lX3Y5HZsF5rd+vNgrMvyKMW/C/D/u/HOUaeEfpzIjceIZHSvHsXg0gzsg LR8dyJRs4fI5sMQa+wTZUjKWqNjv/yZSwZEdz9rtCc/QcD4wJg5BKHd/GHWdXOVM4lH+ lrdA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532boGHg4tFvN5+HI4xEUzDxN/4uj9PozyWeDug9WwU47MrrwXc8 RXb8vVUzQ4v7zIa31TzwOJI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzw7dT7DuLroeMpi/tOn6HV4dIL8x9Vwikz8xM5kRlyFgOqcL6z4RnjLqHE3ANNvd+Td26jsg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:1b45:: with SMTP id p5mr11645122ejg.51.1593000414538; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 05:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pi3 ([194.230.155.235]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id b98sm5452294edf.24.2020.06.24.05.06.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 24 Jun 2020 05:06:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 14:06:51 +0200 From: Krzysztof Kozlowski To: Kamil Konieczny Cc: Lukasz Luba , Willy Wolff , Chanwoo Choi , MyungJoo Ham , Kyungmin Park , Kukjin Kim , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: brocken devfreq simple_ondemand for Odroid XU3/4? Message-ID: <20200624120651.GA20813@pi3> References: <20200623164733.qbhua7b6cg2umafj@macmini.local> <20200623191129.GA4171@kozik-lap> <85f5a8c0-7d48-f2cd-3385-c56d662f2c88@arm.com> <828b0d63-4d01-48d6-5971-64855adebed2@samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT In-Reply-To: <828b0d63-4d01-48d6-5971-64855adebed2@samsung.com> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 01:18:42PM +0200, Kamil Konieczny wrote: > Hi, > > On 24.06.2020 12:32, Lukasz Luba wrote: > > Hi Krzysztof and Willy > > > > On 6/23/20 8:11 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 09:02:38PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>> On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 at 18:47, Willy Wolff wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi everybody, > >>>> > >>>> Is DVFS for memory bus really working on Odroid XU3/4 board? > >>>> Using a simple microbenchmark that is doing only memory accesses, memory DVFS > >>>> seems to not working properly: > >>>> > >>>> The microbenchmark is doing pointer chasing by following index in an array. > >>>> Indices in the array are set to follow a random pattern (cutting prefetcher), > >>>> and forcing RAM access. > >>>> > >>>> git clone https://protect2.fireeye.com/url?k=c364e88a-9eb6fe2f-c36563c5-0cc47a31bee8-631885f0a63a11a0&q=1&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fwwilly%2Fbenchmark.git \ > >>>>    && cd benchmark \ > >>>>    && source env.sh \ > >>>>    && ./bench_build.sh \ > >>>>    && bash source/scripts/test_dvfs_mem.sh > >>>> > >>>> Python 3, cmake and sudo rights are required. > >>>> > >>>> Results: > >>>> DVFS CPU with performance governor > >>>> mem_gov = simple_ondemand at 165000000 Hz in idle, should be bumped when the > >>>> benchmark is running. > >>>> - on the LITTLE cluster it takes 4.74308 s to run (683.004 c per memory access), > >>>> - on the big cluster it takes 4.76556 s to run (980.343 c per moemory access). > >>>> > >>>> While forcing DVFS memory bus to use performance governor, > >>>> mem_gov = performance at 825000000 Hz in idle, > >>>> - on the LITTLE cluster it takes 1.1451 s to run (164.894 c per memory access), > >>>> - on the big cluster it takes 1.18448 s to run (243.664 c per memory access). > >>>> > >>>> The kernel used is the last 5.7.5 stable with default exynos_defconfig. > >>> > >>> Thanks for the report. Few thoughts: > >>> 1. What trans_stat are saying? Except DMC driver you can also check > >>> all other devfreq devices (e.g. wcore) - maybe the devfreq events > >>> (nocp) are not properly assigned? > >>> 2. Try running the measurement for ~1 minutes or longer. The counters > >>> might have some delay (which would require probably fixing but the > >>> point is to narrow the problem). > >>> 3. What do you understand by "mem_gov"? Which device is it? > >> > >> +Cc Lukasz who was working on this. > > > > Thanks Krzysztof for adding me here. > > > >> > >> I just run memtester and more-or-less ondemand works (at least ramps > >> up): > >> > >> Before: > >> /sys/class/devfreq/10c20000.memory-controller$ cat trans_stat > >>       From  :   To > >>             : 165000000 206000000 275000000 413000000 543000000 633000000 728000000 825000000   time(ms) > >> * 165000000:         0         0         0         0         0         0         0         0   1795950 > >>    206000000:         1         0         0         0         0         0         0         0      4770 > >>    275000000:         0         1         0         0         0         0         0         0     15540 > >>    413000000:         0         0         1         0         0         0         0         0     20780 > >>    543000000:         0         0         0         1         0         0         0         1     10760 > >>    633000000:         0         0         0         0         2         0         0         0     10310 > >>    728000000:         0         0         0         0         0         0         0         0         0 > >>    825000000:         0         0         0         0         0         2         0         0     25920 > >> Total transition : 9 > >> > >> > >> $ sudo memtester 1G > >> > >> During memtester: > >> /sys/class/devfreq/10c20000.memory-controller$ cat trans_stat > >>       From  :   To > >>             : 165000000 206000000 275000000 413000000 543000000 633000000 728000000 825000000   time(ms) > >>    165000000:         0         0         0         0         0         0         0         1   1801490 > >>    206000000:         1         0         0         0         0         0         0         0      4770 > >>    275000000:         0         1         0         0         0         0         0         0     15540 > >>    413000000:         0         0         1         0         0         0         0         0     20780 > >>    543000000:         0         0         0         1         0         0         0         2     11090 > >>    633000000:         0         0         0         0         3         0         0         0     17210 > >>    728000000:         0         0         0         0         0         0         0         0         0 > >> * 825000000:         0         0         0         0         0         3         0         0    169020 > >> Total transition : 13 > >> > >> However after killing memtester it stays at 633 MHz for very long time > >> and does not slow down. This is indeed weird... > > > > I had issues with devfreq governor which wasn't called by devfreq > > workqueue. The old DELAYED vs DEFERRED work discussions and my patches > > for it [1]. If the CPU which scheduled the next work went idle, the > > devfreq workqueue will not be kicked and devfreq governor won't check > > DMC status and will not decide to decrease the frequency based on low > > busy_time. > > The same applies for going up with the frequency. They both are > > done by the governor but the workqueue must be scheduled periodically. > > > > I couldn't do much with this back then. I have given the example that > > this is causing issues with the DMC [2]. There is also a description > > of your situation staying at 633MHz for long time: > > ' When it is missing opportunity > > to change the frequency, it can either harm the performance or power > > consumption, depending of the frequency the device stuck on.' > > > > The patches were not accepted because it will cause CPU wake-up from > > idle, which increases the energy consumption. I know that there were > > some other attempts, but I don't know the status. > > > > I had also this devfreq workqueue issue when I have been working on > > thermal cooling for devfreq. The device status was not updated, because > > the devfreq workqueue didn't check the device [3]. > > > > Let me investigate if that is the case. > > > > Regards, > > Lukasz > > > > [1] https%3A%2F%2Flkml.org%2Flkml%2F2019%2F2%2F11%2F1146 > > [2] https%3A%2F%2Flkml.org%2Flkml%2F2019%2F2%2F12%2F383 > > [3] https%3A%2F%2Flwn.net%2Fml%2Flinux-kernel%2F20200511111912.3001-11-lukasz.luba%40arm.com%2F > > and here was another try to fix wq: "PM / devfreq: add possibility for delayed work" > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/12/9/486 My case was clearly showing wrong behavior. System was idle but not sleeping - network working, SSH connection ongoing. Therefore at least one CPU was not idle and could adjust the devfreq/DMC... but this did not happen. The system stayed for like a minute in 633 MHz OPP. Not-waking up idle processors - ok... so why not using power efficient workqueue? It is exactly for this purpose - wake up from time to time on whatever CPU to do the necessary job. Best regards, Krzysztof