On 28-06-18, 17:45, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> The time spent under interrupt can be significant but it is not reflected
> in the utilization of CPU when deciding to choose an OPP. Now that we have
> access to this metric, schedutil can take it into account when selecting
> the OPP for a CPU.
> rqs utilization don't see the time spend under interrupt context and report
> their value in the normal context time window. We need to compensate this when
> adding interrupt utilization
> 
> The CPU utilization is :
>   irq util_avg + (1 - irq util_avg / max capacity ) * /Sum rq util_avg
> 
> A test with iperf on hikey (octo arm64) gives:
> iperf -c server_address -r -t 5
> 
> w/o patch             w/ patch
> Tx 276 Mbits/sec        304 Mbits/sec +10%
> Rx 299 Mbits/sec        328 Mbits/sec +09%
> 
> 8 iterations
> stdev is lower than 1%
> Only WFI idle state is enable (shallowest diel state)
> 
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mi...@redhat.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guit...@linaro.org>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++----
>  kernel/sched/sched.h             | 13 +++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c 
> b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> index edfbfc1..b77bfef 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> @@ -58,6 +58,7 @@ struct sugov_cpu {
>       unsigned long           util_dl;
>       unsigned long           bw_dl;
>       unsigned long           util_rt;
> +     unsigned long           util_irq;
>       unsigned long           max;
>  
>       /* The field below is for single-CPU policies only: */
> @@ -190,21 +191,30 @@ static void sugov_get_util(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu)
>       sg_cpu->util_dl  = cpu_util_dl(rq);
>       sg_cpu->bw_dl    = cpu_bw_dl(rq);
>       sg_cpu->util_rt  = cpu_util_rt(rq);
> +     sg_cpu->util_irq = cpu_util_irq(rq);
>  }
>  
>  static unsigned long sugov_aggregate_util(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu)
>  {
>       struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(sg_cpu->cpu);
> -     unsigned long util;
> +     unsigned long util, max = sg_cpu->max;
>  
>       if (rq->rt.rt_nr_running)
>               return sg_cpu->max;
>  
> +     if (unlikely(sg_cpu->util_irq >= max))
> +             return max;
> +
> +     /* Sum rq utilization */
>       util = sg_cpu->util_cfs;
>       util += sg_cpu->util_rt;
>  
> -     if ((util + sg_cpu->util_dl) >= sg_cpu->max)
> -             return sg_cpu->max;
> +     /*
> +      * Interrupt time is not seen by rqs utilization nso we can compare

                                                         nso ?

> +      * them with the CPU capacity
> +      */
> +     if ((util + sg_cpu->util_dl) >= max)
> +             return max;
>  
>       /*
>        * As there is still idle time on the CPU, we need to compute the
> @@ -220,10 +230,17 @@ static unsigned long sugov_aggregate_util(struct 
> sugov_cpu *sg_cpu)
>        * ready for such an interface. So, we only do the latter for now.
>        */
>  
> +     /* Weight rqs utilization to normal context window */
> +     util *= (max - sg_cpu->util_irq);
> +     util /= max;
> +
> +     /* Add interrupt utilization */
> +     util += sg_cpu->util_irq;
> +
>       /* Add DL bandwidth requirement */
>       util += sg_cpu->bw_dl;
>  
> -     return min(sg_cpu->max, util);
> +     return min(max, util);
>  }
>  
>  /**
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> index 377be2b..9438e68 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
> +++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> @@ -2221,4 +2221,17 @@ static inline unsigned long cpu_util_rt(struct rq *rq)
>  {
>       return rq->avg_rt.util_avg;
>  }
> +
> +#if defined(CONFIG_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING) || 
> defined(CONFIG_PARAVIRT_TIME_ACCOUNTING)
> +static inline unsigned long cpu_util_irq(struct rq *rq)
> +{
> +     return rq->avg_irq.util_avg;
> +}
> +#else
> +static inline unsigned long cpu_util_irq(struct rq *rq)
> +{
> +     return 0;
> +}
> +
> +#endif
>  #endif

Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org>

-- 
viresh

Reply via email to