From: Thara Gopinath <thara.gopinath@linaro.org>
To: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>,
mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, rui.zhang@intel.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, amit.kachhap@gmail.com,
viresh.kumar@linaro.org, javi.merino@kernel.org,
edubezval@gmail.com, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org,
bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/3] Introduce Thermal Pressure
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 12:10:10 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5CC87362.6080307@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8371be92-635b-1979-b1cd-6985ecb4811f@arm.com>
On 04/30/2019 10:39 AM, Ionela Voinescu wrote:
> Hi Thara,
>
> On 29/04/2019 14:29, Ionela Voinescu wrote:
>> Hi Thara,
>>
>>>
>>> Hackbench: (1 group , 30000 loops, 10 runs)
>>> Result Standard Deviation
>>> (Time Secs) (% of mean)
>>>
>>> No Thermal Pressure 10.21 7.99%
>>>
>>> Instantaneous thermal pressure 10.16 5.36%
>>>
>>> Thermal Pressure Averaging
>>> using PELT fmwk 9.88 3.94%
>>>
>>> Thermal Pressure Averaging
>>> non-PELT Algo. Decay : 500 ms 9.94 4.59%
>>>
>>> Thermal Pressure Averaging
>>> non-PELT Algo. Decay : 250 ms 7.52 5.42%
>>>
>>> Thermal Pressure Averaging
>>> non-PELT Algo. Decay : 125 ms 9.87 3.94%
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I'm trying your patches on my Hikey960 and I'm getting different results
>> than the ones here.
>>
>> I'm running with the step-wise governor, enabled only on the big cores.
>> The decay period is set to 250ms.
>>
>> The result for hackbench is:
>>
>> # ./hackbench -g 1 -l 30000
>> Running in process mode with 1 groups using 40 file descriptors each (== 40 tasks)
>> Each sender will pass 30000 messages of 100 bytes
>> Time: 20.756
>>
>> During the run I see the little cores running at maximum frequency
>> (1.84GHz) while the big cores run mostly at 1.8GHz, only sometimes capped
>> at 1.42GHz. There should not be any capacity inversion.
>> The temperature is kept around 75 degrees (73 to 77 degrees).
>>
>> I don't have any kind of active cooling (no fans on the board), only a
>> heatsink on the SoC.
>>
>> But as you see my results(~20s) are very far from the 7-10s in your
>> results.
>>
>> Do you see anything wrong with this process? Can you give me more
>> details on your setup that I can use to test on my board?
>>
>
> I've found that my poor results above were due to debug options
> mistakenly left enabled in the defconfig. Sorry about that!
>
> After cleaning it up I'm getting results around 5.6s for this test case.
> I've run 50 iterations for each test, with 90s cool down period between
> them.
>
>
> Hackbench: (1 group , 30000 loops, 50 runs)
> Result Standard Deviation
> (Time Secs) (% of mean)
>
> No Thermal Pressure(step_wise) 5.644 7.760%
> No Thermal Pressure(IPA) 5.677 9.062%
>
> Thermal Pressure Averaging
> non-PELT Algo. Decay : 250 ms 5.627 5.593%
> (step-wise, bigs capped only)
>
> Thermal Pressure Averaging
> non-PELT Algo. Decay : 250 ms 5.690 3.738%
> (IPA)
>
> All of the results above are within 1.1% difference with a
> significantly higher standard deviation.
Hi Ionela,
I have replied to your original emails without seeing this one. So,
interesting results. I see IPA is worse off (Slightly) than step wise in
both thermal pressure and non-thermal pressure scenarios. Did you try
500 ms decay period by any chance?
>
> I wanted to run this initially to validate my setup and understand
> if there is any conclusion we can draw from a test like this, that
> floods the CPUs with tasks. Looking over the traces, the tasks are
> running almost back to back, trying to use all available resources,
> on all the CPUs.
> Therefore, I doubt that there could be better decisions that could be
> made, knowing about thermal pressure, for this usecase.
>
> I'll try next some capacity inversion usecase and post the results when
> they are ready.
Sure. let me know if I can help.
Regards
Thara
>
> Hope it helps,
> Ionela.
>
>
>> Thank you,
>> Ionela.
>>
--
Regards
Thara
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-30 16:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-16 19:38 [PATCH V2 0/3] Introduce Thermal Pressure Thara Gopinath
2019-04-16 19:38 ` [PATCH V2 1/3] Calculate " Thara Gopinath
2019-04-18 10:14 ` Quentin Perret
2019-04-24 4:13 ` Thara Gopinath
2019-04-24 16:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-24 16:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-25 10:57 ` Quentin Perret
2019-04-25 12:45 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-04-25 12:47 ` Quentin Perret
2019-04-26 14:17 ` Thara Gopinath
2019-05-08 12:41 ` Quentin Perret
2019-04-16 19:38 ` [PATCH V2 2/3] sched/fair: update cpu_capcity to reflect thermal pressure Thara Gopinath
2019-04-16 19:38 ` [PATCH V3 3/3] thermal/cpu-cooling: Update thermal pressure in case of a maximum frequency capping Thara Gopinath
2019-04-18 9:48 ` Quentin Perret
2019-04-23 22:38 ` Thara Gopinath
2019-04-24 15:56 ` Ionela Voinescu
2019-04-26 10:24 ` Thara Gopinath
2019-04-25 10:45 ` Quentin Perret
2019-04-25 12:04 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-04-25 12:50 ` Quentin Perret
2019-04-26 13:47 ` Thara Gopinath
2019-04-24 16:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 5:36 ` [PATCH V2 0/3] Introduce Thermal Pressure Ingo Molnar
2019-04-17 5:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-17 17:28 ` Thara Gopinath
2019-04-17 17:18 ` Thara Gopinath
2019-04-17 18:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-18 0:07 ` Thara Gopinath
2019-04-18 9:22 ` Quentin Perret
2019-04-24 16:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-25 17:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-25 17:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-26 7:08 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-04-26 8:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-24 15:57 ` Ionela Voinescu
2019-04-26 11:50 ` Thara Gopinath
2019-04-26 14:46 ` Ionela Voinescu
2019-04-29 13:29 ` Ionela Voinescu
2019-04-30 14:39 ` Ionela Voinescu
2019-04-30 16:10 ` Thara Gopinath [this message]
2019-05-02 10:44 ` Ionela Voinescu
2019-04-30 15:57 ` Thara Gopinath
2019-04-30 16:02 ` Thara Gopinath
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=5CC87362.6080307@linaro.org \
--to=thara.gopinath@linaro.org \
--cc=amit.kachhap@gmail.com \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=edubezval@gmail.com \
--cc=ionela.voinescu@arm.com \
--cc=javi.merino@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
--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).