Re: [GIT PULL] Scheduler changes for v6.8

From: Dietmar Eggemann
Date: Mon Jan 15 2024 - 09:03:45 EST


On 15/01/2024 14:26, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 at 13:09, Qais Yousef <qyousef@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On 01/15/24 09:21, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>>
>>>> Or I've done the math wrong :-) But the two don't behave the same for the same
>>>> kernel with and without CPPC.
>>>
>>> They will never behave the same because they can't
>>> - with invariance, the utilization is the utilization at max capacity
>>> so we can easily jump several OPP to go directly to the right one
>>> - without invariance, the utilization is the utilization at current
>>> OPP so we can only jump to a limited number of OPP
>>
>> I am probably missing some subtlty, but the behavior looks more sensible to
>> me when we divide by current capacity instead of max one.
>>
>> It seems what you're saying is that the capacity range for each OPP is 0-1024.
>
> Yes that's the case when you don't have frequency invariance
>
>> And that's when we know that we saturated the current capacity level we decide
>> to move on.
>
> yes
>
>>
>> As I am trying to remove the hardcoded headroom values I am wary of another
>> one. But it seems this is bandaid scenario anyway; so maybe I shouldn't worry
>> too much about it.

I still don't fully understand this fix.

We had:

sugov_update_single_freq()

sugov_update_single_common()

next_f = get_next_freq()

freq = arch_scale_freq_invariant() ?
policy->cpuinfo.max_freq : policy->cur (**) <- (2) !freq_inv


util = map_util_perf(util); <- (1) util *= 1.25

freq = map_util_freq(util, freq, max); <- (3)
}



And now there is:

sugov_update_single_freq()

sugov_update_single_common()

sugov_get_util()

sg_cpu->util = sugov_effective_cpu_perf()

/* Add dvfs headroom to actual utilization */
actual = map_util_perf(actual) <- (1) util *= 1.25

next_f = get_next_freq()

freq = get_capacity_ref_freq()

return policy->cur (*) <- (2) !freq_inv

freq = map_util_freq(util, freq, max) <- (3)

Still not clear to me why we need this extra 'policy->cur *= 1.25' here
(*) and not here (**)