LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Claudio Scordino <claudio@evidence.eu.com>,
	Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
	"4 . 12+" <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/schedutil: Don't set next_freq to UINT_MAX
Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 11:23:01 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0jekW=8-VbeVR5GZ6iTxj_oHiFAq7OWqzkAWktL2pU=CA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180509091519.czq5zu5l7xfhqph4@vireshk-i7>

On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 11:15 AM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 09-05-18, 10:56, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> I'm kind of concerned about updating the limits via sysfs in which
>> case the cached next frequency may be out of range, so it's better to
>> invalidate it right away then.
>
> That should not be a problem as __cpufreq_driver_target() will anyway
> clamp the target frequency to be within limits, whatever the cached
> value of next_freq is.

The fast switch case doesn't use it, though.

> And we aren't invalidating the cached next freq immediately currently
> as well, as we are waiting until the next time the util update handler
> is called to set sg_policy->next_freq to UINT_MAX.
>
>> > What else do you have in mind to solve this problem ?
>>
>> Something like the below?
>>
>> ---
>>  kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c |    3 ++-
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> Index: linux-pm/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- linux-pm.orig/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
>> +++ linux-pm/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
>> @@ -305,7 +305,8 @@ static void sugov_update_single(struct u
>>       * Do not reduce the frequency if the CPU has not been idle
>>       * recently, as the reduction is likely to be premature then.
>>       */
>> -    if (busy && next_f < sg_policy->next_freq) {
>> +    if (busy && next_f < sg_policy->next_freq &&
>> +        sg_policy->next_freq != UINT_MAX) {
>>          next_f = sg_policy->next_freq;
>>
>>          /* Reset cached freq as next_freq has changed */
>
> This will fix the problem we have identified currently, but adding a
> special meaning to next_freq == UINT_MAX invites more hidden corner
> cases like the one we just found. IMHO, using next_freq only for the
> *real* frequency values makes its usage more transparent and readable.
> And we already have the need_freq_update flag which we can use for
> this special purpose, as is done in my patch.

So I prefer to do the above as a -stable fix and make the UNIT_MAX
change on top of that.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-05-09  9:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-08  6:42 Viresh Kumar
2018-05-08 20:54 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-09  8:41   ` Viresh Kumar
2018-05-09  8:56     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-09  9:15       ` Viresh Kumar
2018-05-09  9:23         ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2018-05-09  9:30           ` Viresh Kumar
2018-05-09  9:32             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-09  9:44 ` [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: Avoid using invalid next_freq Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-05-09  9:46   ` Viresh Kumar
2018-05-09 10:35   ` [PATCH V2] sched/schedutil: Don't set next_freq to UINT_MAX Viresh Kumar
2018-05-11 20:47     ` [V2] " Joel Fernandes
2018-05-17 10:33       ` Rafael J. Wysocki

Reply instructions:

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:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAJZ5v0jekW=8-VbeVR5GZ6iTxj_oHiFAq7OWqzkAWktL2pU=CA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=claudio@evidence.eu.com \
    --cc=joelaf@google.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=patrick.bellasi@arm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH] sched/schedutil: Don'\''t set next_freq to UINT_MAX' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* 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).