Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1526709

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits

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

Show all headers | View raw


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 | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


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