On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 1:58 PM Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 01:30:01PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > Many people use intel_pstate in the active mode with HWP enabled too.
>
> We now have HWP-passive supported, afaict. So we should discourage that.
Which is kind of ha
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 01:30:01PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Many people use intel_pstate in the active mode with HWP enabled too.
We now have HWP-passive supported, afaict. So we should discourage that.
That is; I'll care less and less about people not using schedutil as
time goes on.
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 04:36:56PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 22-10-20, 11:05, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 02:02:55PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > One of the issues I see with this is that schedutil may not be
> > > available in all configurations and it is still abso
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 1:07 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
>
> On 22-10-20, 11:05, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 02:02:55PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > One of the issues I see with this is that schedutil may not be
> > > available in all configurations and it is still absolutely
On 22-10-20, 11:05, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 02:02:55PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > One of the issues I see with this is that schedutil may not be
> > available in all configurations and it is still absolutely fine to
> > using the suggested helper to get the energy number
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 02:02:55PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 16-07-20, 13:56, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Another point is that cpu_util() vs turbo is a bit iffy, and to that,
> > things like x86-APERF/MPERF and ARM-AMU got mentioned. Those might also
> > have the benefit of giving you values
Hi Peter,
Since Lukasz asked me to hold on to this stuff so he can propose
something in its place, I stayed away from discussing this patchset
for sometime. But now that he agrees [1] that we may take this forward
and he can work on top of it as and when he can, I am looking to find
the way out to
On 10/19/20 8:40 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 30-07-20, 12:16, Lukasz Luba wrote:
Hi Viresh,
On 7/30/20 7:24 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 17-07-20, 11:46, Vincent Guittot wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 at 16:24, Lukasz Luba wrote:
On 7/16/20 12:56 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Currently cpufreq_coo
On 30-07-20, 12:16, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> Hi Viresh,
>
> On 7/30/20 7:24 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 17-07-20, 11:46, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 at 16:24, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> > > > On 7/16/20 12:56 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > > Currently cpufreq_cooling appears to e
Hi Viresh,
On 7/30/20 7:24 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 17-07-20, 11:46, Vincent Guittot wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 at 16:24, Lukasz Luba wrote:
On 7/16/20 12:56 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Currently cpufreq_cooling appears to estimate the CPU energy usage by
calculating the percentage of idle t
On 17-07-20, 11:46, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 at 16:24, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> > On 7/16/20 12:56 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > Currently cpufreq_cooling appears to estimate the CPU energy usage by
> > > calculating the percentage of idle time using the per-cpu cpustat stuff,
>
On 17-07-20, 11:43, Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Friday 17 Jul 2020 at 11:33:05 (+0100), Quentin Perret wrote:
> > On Friday 17 Jul 2020 at 11:14:38 (+0100), Quentin Perret wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 14 Jul 2020 at 12:06:53 (+0530), Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > > /**
> > > > - * get_load() - get load for
On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 at 12:30, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>
>
>
> On 7/17/20 10:46 AM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 at 16:24, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Peter,
> >>
> >> Thank you for summarizing this. I've put my comments below.
> >>
> >> On 7/16/20 12:56 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Friday 17 Jul 2020 at 11:33:05 (+0100), Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Friday 17 Jul 2020 at 11:14:38 (+0100), Quentin Perret wrote:
> > On Tuesday 14 Jul 2020 at 12:06:53 (+0530), Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > /**
> > > - * get_load() - get load for a cpu since last updated
> > > + * get_load() - get
On Friday 17 Jul 2020 at 11:14:38 (+0100), Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Tuesday 14 Jul 2020 at 12:06:53 (+0530), Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > /**
> > - * get_load() - get load for a cpu since last updated
> > + * get_load() - get current load for a cpu
> > * @cpufreq_cdev: &struct cpufreq_cooling_devi
On 7/17/20 10:46 AM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 at 16:24, Lukasz Luba wrote:
Hi Peter,
Thank you for summarizing this. I've put my comments below.
On 7/16/20 12:56 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 12:06:53PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
/**
+ * get_load
On Tuesday 14 Jul 2020 at 12:06:53 (+0530), Viresh Kumar wrote:
> /**
> - * get_load() - get load for a cpu since last updated
> + * get_load() - get current load for a cpu
> * @cpufreq_cdev:&struct cpufreq_cooling_device for this cpu
> * @cpu: cpu number
> - * @cpu_idx: index of the c
On 7/16/20 4:43 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 03:24:37PM +0100, Lukasz Luba wrote:
On 7/16/20 12:56 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
The second attempts to guesstimate power, and is the subject of this
patch.
Currently cpufreq_cooling appears to estimate the CPU energy usage
On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 at 16:24, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> Thank you for summarizing this. I've put my comments below.
>
> On 7/16/20 12:56 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 12:06:53PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >> /**
> >> + * get_load() - get current load for a cp
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 03:24:37PM +0100, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> On 7/16/20 12:56 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > The second attempts to guesstimate power, and is the subject of this
> > patch.
> >
> > Currently cpufreq_cooling appears to estimate the CPU energy usage by
> > calculating the percentag
Hi Peter,
Thank you for summarizing this. I've put my comments below.
On 7/16/20 12:56 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 12:06:53PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
/**
+ * get_load() - get current load for a cpu
* @cpufreq_cdev: &struct cpufreq_cooling_device for this cpu
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 12:06:53PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> /**
> + * get_load() - get current load for a cpu
> * @cpufreq_cdev:&struct cpufreq_cooling_device for this cpu
> * @cpu: cpu number
> + * @cpu_idx: index of the cpu
> *
> + * Return: The current load of cpu @cpu in perc
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 9:32 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
>
> On 14-07-20, 15:05, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 8:37 AM Viresh Kumar
> > wrote:
> > > static u32 get_load(struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev, int cpu,
> > > int cpu_idx)
> > > {
> > >
On 14-07-20, 15:05, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 8:37 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > static u32 get_load(struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev, int cpu,
> > int cpu_idx)
> > {
> > - u32 load;
> > - u64 now, now_idle, delta_time, delta_idle;
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 8:37 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
>
> Several parts of the kernel are already using the effective CPU
> utilization to get the current load on the CPU, do the same here instead
> of depending on the idle time of the CPU, which isn't that accurate
> comparatively.
>
> Note that, t
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 12:06:53PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Several parts of the kernel are already using the effective CPU
> utilization to get the current load on the CPU, do the same here instead
> of depending on the idle time of the CPU, which isn't that accurate
> comparatively.
>
> Note
Several parts of the kernel are already using the effective CPU
utilization to get the current load on the CPU, do the same here instead
of depending on the idle time of the CPU, which isn't that accurate
comparatively.
Note that, this (and CPU frequency scaling in general) doesn't work that
well
27 matches
Mail list logo
