linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>
To: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, viresh.kumar@linaro.org,
	vincent.guittot@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	ionela.voinescu@arm.com, lukasz.luba@arm.com,
	dietmar.eggemann@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM / EM: Inefficient OPPs detection
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 16:14:46 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210415151446.GC391924@e120877-lin.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YHhU6pb8E5W2eeCX@google.com>

On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 02:59:54PM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Thursday 15 Apr 2021 at 15:34:53 (+0100), Vincent Donnefort wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 01:16:35PM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > > On Thursday 08 Apr 2021 at 18:10:29 (+0100), Vincent Donnefort wrote:
> > > > --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> > > > +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> > > > @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
> > > >  
> > > >  #include "sched.h"
> > > >  
> > > > +#include <linux/energy_model.h>
> > > >  #include <linux/sched/cpufreq.h>
> > > >  #include <trace/events/power.h>
> > > >  
> > > > @@ -164,6 +165,9 @@ static unsigned int get_next_freq(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy,
> > > >  
> > > >  	freq = map_util_freq(util, freq, max);
> > > >  
> > > > +	/* Avoid inefficient performance states */
> > > > +	freq = em_pd_get_efficient_freq(em_cpu_get(policy->cpu), freq);
> > > 
> > > I remember this was discussed when Douglas sent his patches some time
> > > ago, but I still find it sad we index the EM table here but still
> > > re-index the cpufreq frequency table later :/
> > > 
> > > Yes in your case this lookup is very inexpensive, but still. EAS relies
> > > on the EM's table matching cpufreq's accurately, so this second lookup
> > > still feels rather unnecessary ...
> > 
> > To get only a single lookup, we would need to bring the inefficiency knowledge
> > directly to the cpufreq framework. But it has its own limitations: 
> > 
> >   The cpufreq driver can have its own resolve_freq() callback, which means that
> >   not all the drivers would benefit from that feature.
> > 
> >   The cpufreq_table can be ordered and accessed in several ways which brings
> >   many combinations that would need to be supported, ending-up with something
> >   much more intrusive. (We can though decide to limit the feature to the low to
> >   high access that schedutil needs).
> > 
> > As the EM needs schedutil to exist anyway, it seemed to be the right place for
> > this code. It allows any cpufreq driver to benefit from the feature, simplify a
> > potential extension for a usage by devfreq devices and as a bonus it speeds-up
> > energy computing, allowing a more complex Energy Model.
> 
> I was thinking of something a bit simpler. cpufreq_driver_resolve_freq
> appears to be used only from schedutil (why is it even then?), so we
> could just pull it into cpufreq_schedutil.c and just plain skip the call
> to cpufreq_frequency_table_target if the target freq has been indexed in
> the EM table -- it should already be matching a real OPP.
> 
> Thoughts?
> Quentin

Can try that for a V2. That means em_pd_get_efficient_freq() would have to
know about policy clamping (but I don't think that's an issue) and probably
we still have to do the frequency resolution if the driver declared the
resolve_freq callback?

-- 
Vincent

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-04-15 15:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-08 17:10 [PATCH] PM / EM: Inefficient OPPs detection Vincent Donnefort
2021-04-08 17:10 ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-04-15 13:12   ` Quentin Perret
2021-04-15 14:12     ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-04-15 15:04       ` Quentin Perret
2021-04-15 15:27         ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-04-22 15:36     ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-04-23 16:14       ` Quentin Perret
2021-04-28 14:46         ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-05-20 11:12           ` Quentin Perret
2021-04-15 13:16   ` Quentin Perret
2021-04-15 14:34     ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-04-15 14:59       ` Quentin Perret
2021-04-15 15:05         ` Quentin Perret
2021-04-15 15:14         ` Vincent Donnefort [this message]
2021-04-15 15:20           ` Quentin Perret
2021-04-15 15:32             ` Lukasz Luba
2021-04-15 15:43               ` Quentin Perret
2021-04-28 13:28                 ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-04-22 17:26   ` Lukasz Luba

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=20210415151446.GC391924@e120877-lin.cambridge.arm.com \
    --to=vincent.donnefort@arm.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=ionela.voinescu@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lukasz.luba@arm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=qperret@google.com \
    --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).