Re: [RFC][PATCH v2 2/2] cpufreq: schedutil: Avoid decreasing frequency of busy CPUs

[Vincent Guittot]

On 21 March 2017 at 18:00, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 21 March 2017 at 15:58, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 03:16:19PM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>> > On 21 March 2017 at 15:03, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:37:08PM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>> > > > On 21 March 2017 at 14:22, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > For the not overloaded case, it makes sense to immediately update to
>> > > > OPP to be aligned with the new utilization of the CPU even if it was
>> > > > not idle in the past couple of ticks
>> > >
>> > > Yeah, but we cannot know. Also, who cares?
>> > >
>> >
>> > embedded system that doesn't want to stay at higest OPP if significant part
>> > of the utilzation has moved away as an example
>> > AFAICT, schedutil tries to select the best OPP according to the current
>> > utilization of the CPU so if the utilization decreases, the OPP should also
>> > decrease
>>
>> Sure I get that; but given the lack of crystal ball instructions we
>> cannot know if this is the case or not.
>
> cfs_rq->avg.load_avg account the waiting time of CPU (in addition to

sorry i wanted to say the waiting time of tasks on the CPU

> the weight of task) so i was wondering if we can't use it to detect if
> we are in the overloaded  case or not even if utilization is not mac
> capacity because we have just migrated a task (and its utilization)
> out
>
>
>
>>
>> And if we really dropped below 100% utilization, we should hit idle
>> fairly soon.