Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1402958
| From | Shilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | [RFC PATCH] Increase in idle power with schedutil |
| Date | 2016-05-18 15:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rA9eW-2gz-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
This patch adds driver callback for fast_switch and below observations
on schedutil governor are done with this patch.
In POWER8 there is a regression observed with schedutil compared to
ondemand. With schedutil the frequency is not ramping down and is
mostly stuck at max frequency during idle . This is because of the
watchdog timer, an RT task which is fired every 4 seconds which
results in requesting max frequency.
In a completely idle system, when there are no processes running apart
from few short running housekeeping tasks (like watchdog) the system is
stuck at max frequency due to 'cpufreq_trigger_update()'
static inline void cpufreq_trigger_update(u64 time)
{
cpufreq_update_util(time, ULONG_MAX, 0);
}
If there is no noise apart from the watchdog timer the cpu is held at
max frequency for no good reason. On a 16 core system I can see an
increase in 20% idle power with schedutil compared to ondemand
governor.
Below is the trace with 'sched:sched_switch' and 'power:cpu_frequency'
events. Here the watchdog timer that runs for a very small period is
requesting Pmax and this gets triggered regularly.
<idle>-0 19059.992912: sched_switch: prev_comm=swapper/16 prev_state=R
==> next_comm=watchdog/16
watchdog/16-107 19059.992914: cpu_frequency: state=4322000 cpu_id=16
watchdog/16-107 19059.992915: sched_switch: prev_comm=watchdog/16 prev_state=S
==> next_comm=swapper/16
However adding a cpufreq hook in pick_next_task_idle() to decrease the
frequency helped to reduce the problem.
static inline void cpufreq_trigger_idle(u64 time)
{
cpufreq_update_util(time, 0, 1);
}
This might not be the right fix for the problem, however this thread
is reporting the other short-comings of cpufreq_trigger_update().
Shilpasri G Bhat (1):
cpufreq: powernv: Add fast_switch callback
drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
--
1.9.3
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFC PATCH] Increase in idle power with schedutil Shilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-05-18 15:00 +0200
[RFC PATCH] cpufreq: powernv: Add fast_switch callback Shilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-05-18 15:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] cpufreq: powernv: Add fast_switch callback "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> - 2016-05-18 23:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] Increase in idle power with schedutil "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> - 2016-05-18 23:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] Increase in idle power with schedutil Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-19 13:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] Increase in idle power with schedutil "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> - 2016-05-19 16:40 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] Increase in idle power with schedutil Shilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-05-20 15:10 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] Increase in idle power with schedutil Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-22 12:40 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] Increase in idle power with schedutil Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@linaro.org> - 2016-05-22 22:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] Increase in idle power with schedutil Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> - 2016-05-23 11:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] Increase in idle power with schedutil Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-23 11:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] Increase in idle power with schedutil Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-23 11:30 +0200
csiph-web