LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joel Fernandes <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Quentin Perret <email@example.com>
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Viresh Kumar <email@example.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Ingo Molnar <email@example.com>,
firstname.lastname@example.org, Pavan Kondeti <email@example.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Juri Lelli <email@example.com>,
Joel Fernandes <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Patrick Bellasi <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "cpufreq: schedutil: Don't restrict kthread to related_cpus unnecessarily"
Date: Sat, 12 May 2018 22:19:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180513051933.GA64158@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 10:42:37AM +0100, Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 May 2018 at 11:09:57 (+0200), Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> > On 05/08/2018 10:22 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > On 08-05-18, 08:33, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> > > > This reverts commit e2cabe48c20efb174ce0c01190f8b9c5f3ea1d13.
> > > >
> > > > Lifting the restriction that the sugov kthread is bound to the
> > > > policy->related_cpus for a system with a slow switching cpufreq driver,
> > > > which is able to perform DVFS from any cpu (e.g. cpufreq-dt), is not
> > > > only not beneficial it also harms Enery-Aware Scheduling (EAS) on
> > > > systems with asymmetric cpu capacities (e.g. Arm big.LITTLE).
> > > >
> > > > The sugov kthread which does the update for the little cpus could
> > > > potentially run on a big cpu. It could prevent that the big cluster goes
> > > > into deeper idle states although all the tasks are running on the little
> > > > cluster.
> > >
> > > I think the original patch did the right thing, but that doesn't suit
> > > everybody as you explained.
> > >
> > > I wouldn't really revert the patch but fix my platform's cpufreq
> > > driver to set dvfs_possible_from_any_cpu = false, so that other
> > > platforms can still benefit from the original commit.
> > This would make sure that the kthreads are bound to the correct set of cpus
> > for platforms with those cpufreq drivers (cpufreq-dt (h960), scmi-cpufreq,
> > scpi-cpufreq) but it will also change the logic (e.g.
> > sugov_should_update_freq() -> cpufreq_can_do_remote_dvfs()).
> > I'm still struggling to understand when a driver/platform should set
> > dvfs_possible_from_any_cpu to true and what the actual benefit would be.
> I assume it might be beneficial to have the kthread moving around freely
> in some cases, but since it is a SCHED_DEADLINE task now it can't really
> migrate anywhere anyway. So I'm not sure either if this commits still makes
> sense now. Or is there another use case for this ?
The usecase I guess is, as Dietmar was saying, that it makes sense for
kthread to update its own cluster and not disturb other clusters or random
CPUs. I agree with this point.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-13 5:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-08 7:33 Dietmar Eggemann
2018-05-08 8:22 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-05-08 9:09 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2018-05-08 9:42 ` Quentin Perret
2018-05-13 5:19 ` Joel Fernandes [this message]
2018-05-17 19:10 ` Saravana Kannan
2018-05-17 19:13 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-08 9:45 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-05-08 10:02 ` Quentin Perret
2018-05-08 10:34 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-05-08 11:00 ` Quentin Perret
2018-05-08 11:14 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-05-08 11:24 ` Quentin Perret
2018-05-08 12:20 ` Juri Lelli
2018-05-08 20:36 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-09 4:55 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-05-08 10:36 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2018-05-08 10:53 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-05-08 12:17 ` Juri Lelli
2018-05-09 4:55 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-05-17 10:32 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--subject='Re: [PATCH] Revert "cpufreq: schedutil: Don'\''t restrict kthread to related_cpus unnecessarily"' \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
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).