Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1526709
| From | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits |
| Date | 2016-11-21 15:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sFXBU-2h6-35@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <sFTHY-8fb-37@gated-at.bofh.it> <sFTRD-8lZ-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <sFVJL-15x-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <sFVTr-18L-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <sFXiC-1QC-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 01:53:08PM +0000, Juri Lelli wrote: > On 21/11/16 13:26, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > So the limited decay would be the dominant factor in ramp-up time, > > leaving the regular PELT period the dominant factor for ramp-down. > > > > Hmmm, AFAIU the limited decay will help not forgetting completely the > contribution of tasks that sleep for a long time, but it won't modify > the actual ramp-up of the signal. So, for new tasks we will need to play > with a sensible initial value (trading off perf and power as usual). Oh, you mean ramp-up for bright spanking new tasks? I forgot the details, but I think we can fudge the 'history' such that those too ramp up quickly. > > (Note that the decay limit would only be applied on the per-task signal, > > not the accumulated signal.) > > > > Right, and since schedutil consumes the latter, we could still suffer > from too frequent frequency switch events I guess (this is where the > down threshold thing came as a quick and dirty fix). Maybe we can think > of some smoothing applied to the accumulated signal, or make it decay > slower (don't really know what this means in practice, though :) ? Not sure I follow. So by limiting decay to the task value, the moment we add it back to the accumulated signal (wakeup), the accumulated signal jumps up quickly and ramp-up is achieved.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-11-17 06:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-11-21 11:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-21 11:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-11-21 11:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-21 12:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-11-21 12:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-21 12:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@arm.com> - 2016-11-21 13:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-21 13:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@arm.com> - 2016-11-21 15:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-21 15:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@arm.com> - 2016-11-21 15:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-21 15:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@arm.com> - 2016-11-21 16:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> - 2016-11-22 10:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> - 2016-11-22 12:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> - 2016-11-21 16:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-21 16:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-21 16:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> - 2016-11-21 17:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-21 17:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> - 2016-11-21 22:00 +0100
csiph-web