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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39162C6FA9D for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2023 17:25:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229812AbjCARZH (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Mar 2023 12:25:07 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53342 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229530AbjCARZE (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Mar 2023 12:25:04 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x333.google.com (mail-wm1-x333.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::333]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A72A239CC2 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2023 09:25:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x333.google.com with SMTP id d41-20020a05600c4c2900b003e9e066550fso8319221wmp.4 for ; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 09:25:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=layalina-io.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=DNndX+4H6chLO8I+hh1AmWGxekdA39u70kqNHMkfGjY=; b=x4ljvNS3rbM3v+lGgoSmYbwXMU6AkIyfLscDpIWH9hVDIjNG+MFfEikJGKS+J5q1/H 2/FaxFtc3HridEfmxTRg1eUW+lU6a2fH/K4Xew8lXwSMFolWKiLuRvG10Olfn7zZshCy TAzomCLt2PL6tVE2vHBUSKC9qWf3GY4pzjYQ0AzvOcZsfNO5B4zp10nNrr0WtVvSNYia 0B/8PvkndWHx75VrEOwpbdIilDgHgFsepDTLNVj1vR9qdBNjNFl2/LcgHvQ8Zxvpog26 p4Ug9BPi3Xu0l+si1MDfFKLXSOtiU/LhBGLOmIpqdMtk2fjGIwaimzot7a0UUJbxJHCC YhnA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=DNndX+4H6chLO8I+hh1AmWGxekdA39u70kqNHMkfGjY=; b=glfW39/w8A/Q0d3zfdA0eXJeIQnUO0ywt+tHRqrPRKqqAG/qyggbqw79rn2GyU9Os3 F2bvwomhHKc98Vutnco8jZNU/FmY1VPj6UGST4D757LpkpE+A7xfKf8XGIaIL2peHWm1 NlTphndOrHlq6Zhuw8CksHQm8BRf/ZFnZ7MtT0/zQYJBiqo8AMQ1cgCNxVsuBuXgFa4I QUyy7Ek+7e6izv+F7JOTNFgurF48+dNEcXWMcV3i9JwoazVbpIvjD1RBC/MYTdoGNKSU 7VASTg17qDYiV43Q0PSDgpG7TFRPv7MPr9YpZ5vHAwfI07AU6/OoqG7yqeTASTU4ySzv GSkg== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXGRE9pQVjCJrP5Ie7xSLZGbbVASXgRD5D+vKH+FzTheu1CMaC6 k+ZHHPqHmB98+u4hHSDK9TxRWQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set9Hn0i50GSL/UVSOJbZ6KQPVu0yp4zHQDiZPoRGJGUCBrpQplmmnMzEEoHHnvy0XjnxLxOlKA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3b26:b0:3ea:f05b:50cc with SMTP id m38-20020a05600c3b2600b003eaf05b50ccmr6391473wms.8.1677691501123; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 09:25:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from airbuntu (host86-168-251-3.range86-168.btcentralplus.com. [86.168.251.3]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id hn4-20020a05600ca38400b003dc5b59ed7asm211450wmb.11.2023.03.01.09.24.59 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 01 Mar 2023 09:24:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2023 17:24:58 +0000 From: Qais Yousef To: Vincent Guittot Cc: Dietmar Eggemann , Peter Zijlstra , Kajetan Puchalski , Jian-Min Liu , Ingo Molnar , Morten Rasmussen , Vincent Donnefort , Quentin Perret , Patrick Bellasi , Abhijeet Dharmapurikar , Qais Yousef , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan JMChen Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/1] sched/pelt: Change PELT halflife at runtime Message-ID: <20230301172458.intrgsirjauzqmo3@airbuntu> References: <20221108194843.i4qckcu7zwqstyis@airbuntu> <424e2c81-987d-f10e-106d-8b4c611768bc@arm.com> <20230223153700.55zydy7jyfwidkis@airbuntu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/01/23 11:39, Vincent Guittot wrote: > On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 at 16:37, Qais Yousef wrote: > > > > On 02/09/23 17:16, Vincent Guittot wrote: > > > > > I don't see how util_est_faster can help this 1ms task here ? It's > > > most probably never be preempted during this 1ms. For such an Android > > > Graphics Pipeline short task, hasn't uclamp_min been designed for and > > > a better solution ? > > > > uclamp_min is being used in UI and helping there. But your mileage might vary > > with adoption still. > > > > The major motivation behind this is to help things like gaming as the original > > thread started. It can help UI and other use cases too. Android framework has > > a lot of context on the type of workload that can help it make a decision when > > this helps. And OEMs can have the chance to tune and apply based on the > > characteristics of their device. > > > > > IIUC how util_est_faster works, it removes the waiting time when > > > sharing cpu time with other tasks. So as long as there is no (runnable > > > but not running time), the result is the same as current util_est. > > > util_est_faster makes a difference only when the task alternates > > > between runnable and running slices. > > > Have you considered using runnable_avg metrics in the increase of cpu > > > freq ? This takes into the runnable slice and not only the running > > > time and increase faster than util_avg when tasks compete for the same > > > CPU > > > > Just to understand why we're heading into this direction now. > > > > AFAIU the desired outcome to have faster rampup time (and on HMP faster up > > migration) which both are tied to utilization signal. > > > > Wouldn't make the util response time faster help not just for rampup, but > > rampdown too? > > > > If we improve util response time, couldn't this mean we can remove util_est or > > am I missing something? > > not sure because you still have a ramping step whereas util_est > directly gives you the final tager I didn't get you. tager? > > > > > Currently we have util response which is tweaked by util_est and then that is > > tweaked further by schedutil with that 25% margin when maping util to > > frequency. > > the 25% is not related to the ramping time but to the fact that you > always need some margin to cover unexpected events and estimation > error At the moment we have util_avg -> util_est -> (util_est_faster) -> util_map_freq -> schedutil filter ==> current frequency selection I think we have too many transformations before deciding the current frequencies. Which makes it hard to tweak the system response. > > > > > I think if we can allow improving general util response time by tweaking PELT > > HALFLIFE we can potentially remove util_est and potentially that magic 25% > > margin too. > > > > Why the approach of further tweaking util_est is better? > > note that in this case it doesn't really tweak util_est but Dietmar > has taken into account runnable_avg to increase the freq in case of > contention > > Also IIUC Dietmar's results, the problem seems more linked to the > selection of a higher freq than increasing the utilization; > runnable_avg tests give similar perf results than shorter half life > and better power consumption. Does it ramp down faster too? Thanks -- Qais Yousef > > > > > Recently phoronix reported that schedutil behavior is suboptimal and I wonder > > if the response time is contributing to that > > > > https://www.phoronix.com/review/schedutil-quirky-2023 > > > > > > Cheers > > > > -- > > Qais Yousef