Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1682956
| From | Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@codeaurora.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] cpufreq: schedutil: update CFS util only if used |
| Date | 2017-07-07 08:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <u0vfr-5W-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tZzXQ-2ZJ-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <tZzXQ-2ZJ-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 2017-07-04 10:34, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> Currently the utilization of the FAIR class is collected before locking
> the policy. Although that should not be a big issue for most cases, we
> also don't really know how much latency there can be between the
> utilization reading and its usage.
>
> Let's get the FAIR utilization right before its usage to be better in
> sync with the current status of a CPU.
>
> Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
> ---
> kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> index 98704d8..df433f1 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> @@ -308,10 +308,9 @@ static void sugov_update_shared(struct
> update_util_data *hook, u64 time,
> if (unlikely(current == sg_policy->thread))
> return;
>
> - sugov_get_util(&util, &max);
> -
> raw_spin_lock(&sg_policy->update_lock);
>
> + sugov_get_util(&util, &max);
> sg_cpu->util = util;
> sg_cpu->max = max;
Given that the utilization update hooks are called with the per-cpu rq
lock held (for all classes), I don't think PELT utilization can change
throughout the lifetime of the cpufreq_update_{util,this_cpu} call? Even
with Viresh's remote cpu callback series we'd still have to hold the rq
lock across cpufreq_update_util.. what can change today is 'max'
(arch_scale_cpu_capacity) when a cpufreq policy is shared, so the patch
is still needed for that reason I think?
Thanks,
Vikram
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v2 4/6] cpufreq: schedutil: update CFS util only if used Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> - 2017-07-04 19:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] cpufreq: schedutil: update CFS util only if used Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> - 2017-07-07 08:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] cpufreq: schedutil: update CFS util only if used Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@codeaurora.org> - 2017-07-07 08:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] cpufreq: schedutil: update CFS util only if used Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> - 2017-07-08 08:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] cpufreq: schedutil: update CFS util only if used Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@codeaurora.org> - 2017-07-10 20:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] cpufreq: schedutil: update CFS util only if used Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> - 2017-07-11 07:30 +0200
csiph-web