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=-5.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,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 61A3CC48BC2 for ; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 13:32:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44D9A60FE9 for ; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 13:32:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231694AbhFYNeZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jun 2021 09:34:25 -0400 Received: from alexa-out-sd-02.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.39]:27913 "EHLO alexa-out-sd-02.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229615AbhFYNeX (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jun 2021 09:34:23 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=quicinc.com; i=@quicinc.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1624627923; x=1656163923; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=c92uEGAxnyrw7O3VecCM/YRAymsWQVHnDR1PxIKS3zQ=; b=Nm/8Pu6RAEeRpS68bW+L2CFSDv/t9Q7Za7hJ4oaSqXDtT+8AoVgaDAsb TC7nHa9/FJXltEFYNb0Wws4oVZmZA6FZKr21ms2v3U5PZEG6Vii7jyhp4 FwjP12ZVnbnoRcZsrHDGPqBhHdKIVZOwURwwYaKi5VYpUSeAfAgaEdAby 0=; Received: from unknown (HELO ironmsg01-sd.qualcomm.com) ([10.53.140.141]) by alexa-out-sd-02.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 25 Jun 2021 06:32:02 -0700 X-QCInternal: smtphost Received: from nasanexm03e.na.qualcomm.com ([10.85.0.48]) by ironmsg01-sd.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 25 Jun 2021 06:32:02 -0700 Received: from [10.111.161.13] (10.80.80.8) by nasanexm03e.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.48) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.18; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 06:31:59 -0700 Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] cpufreq: cppc: Add support for frequency invariance To: Ionela Voinescu CC: Vincent Guittot , Viresh Kumar , Rafael Wysocki , Ben Segall , Daniel Bristot de Oliveira , Dietmar Eggemann , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ingo Molnar , Juri Lelli , Mel Gorman , Peter Zijlstra , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Steven Rostedt , Sudeep Holla , Will Deacon , "open list:THERMAL" , ACPI Devel Maling List , linux-kernel , "Paul E. McKenney" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" References: <09a39f5c-b47b-a931-bf23-dc43229fb2dd@quicinc.com> <20210623041613.v2lo3nidpgw37abl@vireshk-i7> <2c540a58-4fef-5a3d-85b4-8862721b6c4f@quicinc.com> <20210624025414.4iszkovggk6lg6hj@vireshk-i7> <20210624104734.GA11487@arm.com> <20210625102113.GB15540@arm.com> From: Qian Cai Message-ID: <1f83d787-a796-0db3-3c2f-1ca616eb1979@quicinc.com> Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2021 09:31:58 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210625102113.GB15540@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.80.80.8] X-ClientProxiedBy: nasanexm03e.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.48) To nasanexm03e.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.48) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 6/25/2021 6:21 AM, Ionela Voinescu wrote: >> scaling_driver: acpi_cppc > ^^^^^^^^^ > I suppose you mean "cppc-cpufreq"? > > "acpi_cppc" is not a scaling driver option. Ionela, yes. Sorry about that. > So your CPUs run at frequencies between 200MHz and 280MHz? 2000 to 2800 MHz. > Based on your acpi_cppc information below I would have assumed 2GHz as > lowest nonlinear and 2.8GHz as nominal. The reason for this is that > according to the ACPI spec the frequency values in the _CPC objects are > supposed to be in MHz, so 2800 MHz for nominal frequency would be > 2.8GHz. > > When you try more governors, make sure to check out the difference > between scaling_cur_freq and cpuinfo_cur_freq at [2]. The first gives > you the frequency that the governor (schedutil) is asking for, while the > second is giving you the current frequency obtained from the counters. > > So to check the actual frequency the cores are running at, please check > cpuinfo_cur_freq. The problem is that all CPUs are never scaling down. "cpuinfo_cur_freq" and "scaling_cur_freq" are always the 2800 MHz on all CPUs on this idle system. This looks like a regression somewhere as in 5.4-based kernel, I can see "cpuinfo_cur_freq" can go down to 2000 MHz in the same scenario. I'll bisect a bit unless you have better ideas?