linux_dsm_epyc7002/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c

947 lines
26 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
/*
* CPUFreq governor based on scheduler-provided CPU utilization data.
*
* Copyright (C) 2016, Intel Corporation
* Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
*/
#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
#include "sched.h"
sched/cpufreq: Prepare schedutil for Energy Aware Scheduling Schedutil requests frequency by aggregating utilization signals from the scheduler (CFS, RT, DL, IRQ) and applying a 25% margin on top of them. Since Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) needs to be able to predict the frequency requests, it needs to forecast the decisions made by the governor. In order to prepare the introduction of EAS, introduce schedutil_freq_util() to centralize the aforementioned signal aggregation and make it available to both schedutil and EAS. Since frequency selection and energy estimation still need to deal with RT and DL signals slightly differently, schedutil_freq_util() is called with a different 'type' parameter in those two contexts, and returns an aggregated utilization signal accordingly. While at it, introduce the map_util_freq() function which is designed to make schedutil's 25% margin usable easily for both sugov and EAS. As EAS will be able to predict schedutil's frequency requests more accurately than any other governor by design, it'd be sensible to make sure EAS cannot be used without schedutil. This will be done later, once EAS has actually been introduced. Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: adharmap@codeaurora.org Cc: chris.redpath@arm.com Cc: currojerez@riseup.net Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: edubezval@gmail.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: javi.merino@kernel.org Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: pkondeti@codeaurora.org Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: skannan@codeaurora.org Cc: smuckle@google.com Cc: srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com Cc: thara.gopinath@linaro.org Cc: tkjos@google.com Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181203095628.11858-3-quentin.perret@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-12-03 16:56:15 +07:00
#include <linux/sched/cpufreq.h>
#include <trace/events/power.h>
#define IOWAIT_BOOST_MIN (SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE / 8)
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
struct sugov_tunables {
struct gov_attr_set attr_set;
unsigned int rate_limit_us;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
};
struct sugov_policy {
struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
struct sugov_tunables *tunables;
struct list_head tunables_hook;
raw_spinlock_t update_lock; /* For shared policies */
u64 last_freq_update_time;
s64 freq_update_delay_ns;
unsigned int next_freq;
unsigned int cached_raw_freq;
/* The next fields are only needed if fast switch cannot be used: */
struct irq_work irq_work;
struct kthread_work work;
struct mutex work_lock;
struct kthread_worker worker;
struct task_struct *thread;
bool work_in_progress;
bool limits_changed;
bool need_freq_update;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
};
struct sugov_cpu {
struct update_util_data update_util;
struct sugov_policy *sg_policy;
unsigned int cpu;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
bool iowait_boost_pending;
unsigned int iowait_boost;
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
u64 last_update;
unsigned long bw_dl;
unsigned long max;
cpufreq: schedutil: Avoid reducing frequency of busy CPUs prematurely The way the schedutil governor uses the PELT metric causes it to underestimate the CPU utilization in some cases. That can be easily demonstrated by running kernel compilation on a Sandy Bridge Intel processor, running turbostat in parallel with it and looking at the values written to the MSR_IA32_PERF_CTL register. Namely, the expected result would be that when all CPUs were 100% busy, all of them would be requested to run in the maximum P-state, but observation shows that this clearly isn't the case. The CPUs run in the maximum P-state for a while and then are requested to run slower and go back to the maximum P-state after a while again. That causes the actual frequency of the processor to visibly oscillate below the sustainable maximum in a jittery fashion which clearly is not desirable. That has been attributed to CPU utilization metric updates on task migration that cause the total utilization value for the CPU to be reduced by the utilization of the migrated task. If that happens, the schedutil governor may see a CPU utilization reduction and will attempt to reduce the CPU frequency accordingly right away. That may be premature, though, for example if the system is generally busy and there are other runnable tasks waiting to be run on that CPU already. This is unlikely to be an issue on systems where cpufreq policies are shared between multiple CPUs, because in those cases the policy utilization is computed as the maximum of the CPU utilization values over the whole policy and if that turns out to be low, reducing the frequency for the policy most likely is a good idea anyway. On systems with one CPU per policy, however, it may affect performance adversely and even lead to increased energy consumption in some cases. On those systems it may be addressed by taking another utilization metric into consideration, like whether or not the CPU whose frequency is about to be reduced has been idle recently, because if that's not the case, the CPU is likely to be busy in the near future and its frequency should not be reduced. To that end, use the counter of idle calls in the timekeeping code. Namely, make the schedutil governor look at that counter for the current CPU every time before its frequency is about to be reduced. If the counter has not changed since the previous iteration of the governor computations for that CPU, the CPU has been busy for all that time and its frequency should not be decreased, so if the new frequency would be lower than the one set previously, the governor will skip the frequency update. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
2017-03-22 06:08:50 +07:00
/* The field below is for single-CPU policies only: */
cpufreq: schedutil: Avoid reducing frequency of busy CPUs prematurely The way the schedutil governor uses the PELT metric causes it to underestimate the CPU utilization in some cases. That can be easily demonstrated by running kernel compilation on a Sandy Bridge Intel processor, running turbostat in parallel with it and looking at the values written to the MSR_IA32_PERF_CTL register. Namely, the expected result would be that when all CPUs were 100% busy, all of them would be requested to run in the maximum P-state, but observation shows that this clearly isn't the case. The CPUs run in the maximum P-state for a while and then are requested to run slower and go back to the maximum P-state after a while again. That causes the actual frequency of the processor to visibly oscillate below the sustainable maximum in a jittery fashion which clearly is not desirable. That has been attributed to CPU utilization metric updates on task migration that cause the total utilization value for the CPU to be reduced by the utilization of the migrated task. If that happens, the schedutil governor may see a CPU utilization reduction and will attempt to reduce the CPU frequency accordingly right away. That may be premature, though, for example if the system is generally busy and there are other runnable tasks waiting to be run on that CPU already. This is unlikely to be an issue on systems where cpufreq policies are shared between multiple CPUs, because in those cases the policy utilization is computed as the maximum of the CPU utilization values over the whole policy and if that turns out to be low, reducing the frequency for the policy most likely is a good idea anyway. On systems with one CPU per policy, however, it may affect performance adversely and even lead to increased energy consumption in some cases. On those systems it may be addressed by taking another utilization metric into consideration, like whether or not the CPU whose frequency is about to be reduced has been idle recently, because if that's not the case, the CPU is likely to be busy in the near future and its frequency should not be reduced. To that end, use the counter of idle calls in the timekeeping code. Namely, make the schedutil governor look at that counter for the current CPU every time before its frequency is about to be reduced. If the counter has not changed since the previous iteration of the governor computations for that CPU, the CPU has been busy for all that time and its frequency should not be decreased, so if the new frequency would be lower than the one set previously, the governor will skip the frequency update. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
2017-03-22 06:08:50 +07:00
#ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON
unsigned long saved_idle_calls;
cpufreq: schedutil: Avoid reducing frequency of busy CPUs prematurely The way the schedutil governor uses the PELT metric causes it to underestimate the CPU utilization in some cases. That can be easily demonstrated by running kernel compilation on a Sandy Bridge Intel processor, running turbostat in parallel with it and looking at the values written to the MSR_IA32_PERF_CTL register. Namely, the expected result would be that when all CPUs were 100% busy, all of them would be requested to run in the maximum P-state, but observation shows that this clearly isn't the case. The CPUs run in the maximum P-state for a while and then are requested to run slower and go back to the maximum P-state after a while again. That causes the actual frequency of the processor to visibly oscillate below the sustainable maximum in a jittery fashion which clearly is not desirable. That has been attributed to CPU utilization metric updates on task migration that cause the total utilization value for the CPU to be reduced by the utilization of the migrated task. If that happens, the schedutil governor may see a CPU utilization reduction and will attempt to reduce the CPU frequency accordingly right away. That may be premature, though, for example if the system is generally busy and there are other runnable tasks waiting to be run on that CPU already. This is unlikely to be an issue on systems where cpufreq policies are shared between multiple CPUs, because in those cases the policy utilization is computed as the maximum of the CPU utilization values over the whole policy and if that turns out to be low, reducing the frequency for the policy most likely is a good idea anyway. On systems with one CPU per policy, however, it may affect performance adversely and even lead to increased energy consumption in some cases. On those systems it may be addressed by taking another utilization metric into consideration, like whether or not the CPU whose frequency is about to be reduced has been idle recently, because if that's not the case, the CPU is likely to be busy in the near future and its frequency should not be reduced. To that end, use the counter of idle calls in the timekeeping code. Namely, make the schedutil governor look at that counter for the current CPU every time before its frequency is about to be reduced. If the counter has not changed since the previous iteration of the governor computations for that CPU, the CPU has been busy for all that time and its frequency should not be decreased, so if the new frequency would be lower than the one set previously, the governor will skip the frequency update. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
2017-03-22 06:08:50 +07:00
#endif
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
};
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct sugov_cpu, sugov_cpu);
/************************ Governor internals ***********************/
static bool sugov_should_update_freq(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, u64 time)
{
s64 delta_ns;
sched: cpufreq: Allow remote cpufreq callbacks With Android UI and benchmarks the latency of cpufreq response to certain scheduling events can become very critical. Currently, callbacks into cpufreq governors are only made from the scheduler if the target CPU of the event is the same as the current CPU. This means there are certain situations where a target CPU may not run the cpufreq governor for some time. One testcase to show this behavior is where a task starts running on CPU0, then a new task is also spawned on CPU0 by a task on CPU1. If the system is configured such that the new tasks should receive maximum demand initially, this should result in CPU0 increasing frequency immediately. But because of the above mentioned limitation though, this does not occur. This patch updates the scheduler core to call the cpufreq callbacks for remote CPUs as well. The schedutil, ondemand and conservative governors are updated to process cpufreq utilization update hooks called for remote CPUs where the remote CPU is managed by the cpufreq policy of the local CPU. The intel_pstate driver is updated to always reject remote callbacks. This is tested with couple of usecases (Android: hackbench, recentfling, galleryfling, vellamo, Ubuntu: hackbench) on ARM hikey board (64 bit octa-core, single policy). Only galleryfling showed minor improvements, while others didn't had much deviation. The reason being that this patch only targets a corner case, where following are required to be true to improve performance and that doesn't happen too often with these tests: - Task is migrated to another CPU. - The task has high demand, and should take the target CPU to higher OPPs. - And the target CPU doesn't call into the cpufreq governor until the next tick. Based on initial work from Steve Muckle. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2017-07-28 13:46:38 +07:00
/*
* Since cpufreq_update_util() is called with rq->lock held for
* the @target_cpu, our per-CPU data is fully serialized.
sched: cpufreq: Allow remote cpufreq callbacks With Android UI and benchmarks the latency of cpufreq response to certain scheduling events can become very critical. Currently, callbacks into cpufreq governors are only made from the scheduler if the target CPU of the event is the same as the current CPU. This means there are certain situations where a target CPU may not run the cpufreq governor for some time. One testcase to show this behavior is where a task starts running on CPU0, then a new task is also spawned on CPU0 by a task on CPU1. If the system is configured such that the new tasks should receive maximum demand initially, this should result in CPU0 increasing frequency immediately. But because of the above mentioned limitation though, this does not occur. This patch updates the scheduler core to call the cpufreq callbacks for remote CPUs as well. The schedutil, ondemand and conservative governors are updated to process cpufreq utilization update hooks called for remote CPUs where the remote CPU is managed by the cpufreq policy of the local CPU. The intel_pstate driver is updated to always reject remote callbacks. This is tested with couple of usecases (Android: hackbench, recentfling, galleryfling, vellamo, Ubuntu: hackbench) on ARM hikey board (64 bit octa-core, single policy). Only galleryfling showed minor improvements, while others didn't had much deviation. The reason being that this patch only targets a corner case, where following are required to be true to improve performance and that doesn't happen too often with these tests: - Task is migrated to another CPU. - The task has high demand, and should take the target CPU to higher OPPs. - And the target CPU doesn't call into the cpufreq governor until the next tick. Based on initial work from Steve Muckle. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2017-07-28 13:46:38 +07:00
*
* However, drivers cannot in general deal with cross-CPU
sched: cpufreq: Allow remote cpufreq callbacks With Android UI and benchmarks the latency of cpufreq response to certain scheduling events can become very critical. Currently, callbacks into cpufreq governors are only made from the scheduler if the target CPU of the event is the same as the current CPU. This means there are certain situations where a target CPU may not run the cpufreq governor for some time. One testcase to show this behavior is where a task starts running on CPU0, then a new task is also spawned on CPU0 by a task on CPU1. If the system is configured such that the new tasks should receive maximum demand initially, this should result in CPU0 increasing frequency immediately. But because of the above mentioned limitation though, this does not occur. This patch updates the scheduler core to call the cpufreq callbacks for remote CPUs as well. The schedutil, ondemand and conservative governors are updated to process cpufreq utilization update hooks called for remote CPUs where the remote CPU is managed by the cpufreq policy of the local CPU. The intel_pstate driver is updated to always reject remote callbacks. This is tested with couple of usecases (Android: hackbench, recentfling, galleryfling, vellamo, Ubuntu: hackbench) on ARM hikey board (64 bit octa-core, single policy). Only galleryfling showed minor improvements, while others didn't had much deviation. The reason being that this patch only targets a corner case, where following are required to be true to improve performance and that doesn't happen too often with these tests: - Task is migrated to another CPU. - The task has high demand, and should take the target CPU to higher OPPs. - And the target CPU doesn't call into the cpufreq governor until the next tick. Based on initial work from Steve Muckle. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2017-07-28 13:46:38 +07:00
* requests, so while get_next_freq() will work, our
* sugov_update_commit() call may not for the fast switching platforms.
sched: cpufreq: Allow remote cpufreq callbacks With Android UI and benchmarks the latency of cpufreq response to certain scheduling events can become very critical. Currently, callbacks into cpufreq governors are only made from the scheduler if the target CPU of the event is the same as the current CPU. This means there are certain situations where a target CPU may not run the cpufreq governor for some time. One testcase to show this behavior is where a task starts running on CPU0, then a new task is also spawned on CPU0 by a task on CPU1. If the system is configured such that the new tasks should receive maximum demand initially, this should result in CPU0 increasing frequency immediately. But because of the above mentioned limitation though, this does not occur. This patch updates the scheduler core to call the cpufreq callbacks for remote CPUs as well. The schedutil, ondemand and conservative governors are updated to process cpufreq utilization update hooks called for remote CPUs where the remote CPU is managed by the cpufreq policy of the local CPU. The intel_pstate driver is updated to always reject remote callbacks. This is tested with couple of usecases (Android: hackbench, recentfling, galleryfling, vellamo, Ubuntu: hackbench) on ARM hikey board (64 bit octa-core, single policy). Only galleryfling showed minor improvements, while others didn't had much deviation. The reason being that this patch only targets a corner case, where following are required to be true to improve performance and that doesn't happen too often with these tests: - Task is migrated to another CPU. - The task has high demand, and should take the target CPU to higher OPPs. - And the target CPU doesn't call into the cpufreq governor until the next tick. Based on initial work from Steve Muckle. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2017-07-28 13:46:38 +07:00
*
* Hence stop here for remote requests if they aren't supported
* by the hardware, as calculating the frequency is pointless if
* we cannot in fact act on it.
*
* For the slow switching platforms, the kthread is always scheduled on
* the right set of CPUs and any CPU can find the next frequency and
* schedule the kthread.
sched: cpufreq: Allow remote cpufreq callbacks With Android UI and benchmarks the latency of cpufreq response to certain scheduling events can become very critical. Currently, callbacks into cpufreq governors are only made from the scheduler if the target CPU of the event is the same as the current CPU. This means there are certain situations where a target CPU may not run the cpufreq governor for some time. One testcase to show this behavior is where a task starts running on CPU0, then a new task is also spawned on CPU0 by a task on CPU1. If the system is configured such that the new tasks should receive maximum demand initially, this should result in CPU0 increasing frequency immediately. But because of the above mentioned limitation though, this does not occur. This patch updates the scheduler core to call the cpufreq callbacks for remote CPUs as well. The schedutil, ondemand and conservative governors are updated to process cpufreq utilization update hooks called for remote CPUs where the remote CPU is managed by the cpufreq policy of the local CPU. The intel_pstate driver is updated to always reject remote callbacks. This is tested with couple of usecases (Android: hackbench, recentfling, galleryfling, vellamo, Ubuntu: hackbench) on ARM hikey board (64 bit octa-core, single policy). Only galleryfling showed minor improvements, while others didn't had much deviation. The reason being that this patch only targets a corner case, where following are required to be true to improve performance and that doesn't happen too often with these tests: - Task is migrated to another CPU. - The task has high demand, and should take the target CPU to higher OPPs. - And the target CPU doesn't call into the cpufreq governor until the next tick. Based on initial work from Steve Muckle. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2017-07-28 13:46:38 +07:00
*/
if (sg_policy->policy->fast_switch_enabled &&
!cpufreq_this_cpu_can_update(sg_policy->policy))
sched: cpufreq: Allow remote cpufreq callbacks With Android UI and benchmarks the latency of cpufreq response to certain scheduling events can become very critical. Currently, callbacks into cpufreq governors are only made from the scheduler if the target CPU of the event is the same as the current CPU. This means there are certain situations where a target CPU may not run the cpufreq governor for some time. One testcase to show this behavior is where a task starts running on CPU0, then a new task is also spawned on CPU0 by a task on CPU1. If the system is configured such that the new tasks should receive maximum demand initially, this should result in CPU0 increasing frequency immediately. But because of the above mentioned limitation though, this does not occur. This patch updates the scheduler core to call the cpufreq callbacks for remote CPUs as well. The schedutil, ondemand and conservative governors are updated to process cpufreq utilization update hooks called for remote CPUs where the remote CPU is managed by the cpufreq policy of the local CPU. The intel_pstate driver is updated to always reject remote callbacks. This is tested with couple of usecases (Android: hackbench, recentfling, galleryfling, vellamo, Ubuntu: hackbench) on ARM hikey board (64 bit octa-core, single policy). Only galleryfling showed minor improvements, while others didn't had much deviation. The reason being that this patch only targets a corner case, where following are required to be true to improve performance and that doesn't happen too often with these tests: - Task is migrated to another CPU. - The task has high demand, and should take the target CPU to higher OPPs. - And the target CPU doesn't call into the cpufreq governor until the next tick. Based on initial work from Steve Muckle. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2017-07-28 13:46:38 +07:00
return false;
if (unlikely(sg_policy->limits_changed)) {
sg_policy->limits_changed = false;
sg_policy->need_freq_update = true;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
return true;
}
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
delta_ns = time - sg_policy->last_freq_update_time;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
return delta_ns >= sg_policy->freq_update_delay_ns;
}
static bool sugov_update_next_freq(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, u64 time,
unsigned int next_freq)
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
{
if (sg_policy->next_freq == next_freq)
return false;
sg_policy->next_freq = next_freq;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
sg_policy->last_freq_update_time = time;
return true;
}
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
static void sugov_fast_switch(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, u64 time,
unsigned int next_freq)
{
struct cpufreq_policy *policy = sg_policy->policy;
if (!sugov_update_next_freq(sg_policy, time, next_freq))
return;
next_freq = cpufreq_driver_fast_switch(policy, next_freq);
if (!next_freq)
return;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
policy->cur = next_freq;
trace_cpu_frequency(next_freq, smp_processor_id());
}
static void sugov_deferred_update(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, u64 time,
unsigned int next_freq)
{
if (!sugov_update_next_freq(sg_policy, time, next_freq))
return;
if (!sg_policy->work_in_progress) {
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
sg_policy->work_in_progress = true;
irq_work_queue(&sg_policy->irq_work);
}
}
/**
* get_next_freq - Compute a new frequency for a given cpufreq policy.
* @sg_policy: schedutil policy object to compute the new frequency for.
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
* @util: Current CPU utilization.
* @max: CPU capacity.
*
* If the utilization is frequency-invariant, choose the new frequency to be
* proportional to it, that is
*
* next_freq = C * max_freq * util / max
*
* Otherwise, approximate the would-be frequency-invariant utilization by
* util_raw * (curr_freq / max_freq) which leads to
*
* next_freq = C * curr_freq * util_raw / max
*
* Take C = 1.25 for the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8.
*
* The lowest driver-supported frequency which is equal or greater than the raw
* next_freq (as calculated above) is returned, subject to policy min/max and
* cpufreq driver limitations.
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
*/
static unsigned int get_next_freq(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy,
unsigned long util, unsigned long max)
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
{
struct cpufreq_policy *policy = sg_policy->policy;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
unsigned int freq = arch_scale_freq_invariant() ?
policy->cpuinfo.max_freq : policy->cur;
sched/cpufreq: Prepare schedutil for Energy Aware Scheduling Schedutil requests frequency by aggregating utilization signals from the scheduler (CFS, RT, DL, IRQ) and applying a 25% margin on top of them. Since Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) needs to be able to predict the frequency requests, it needs to forecast the decisions made by the governor. In order to prepare the introduction of EAS, introduce schedutil_freq_util() to centralize the aforementioned signal aggregation and make it available to both schedutil and EAS. Since frequency selection and energy estimation still need to deal with RT and DL signals slightly differently, schedutil_freq_util() is called with a different 'type' parameter in those two contexts, and returns an aggregated utilization signal accordingly. While at it, introduce the map_util_freq() function which is designed to make schedutil's 25% margin usable easily for both sugov and EAS. As EAS will be able to predict schedutil's frequency requests more accurately than any other governor by design, it'd be sensible to make sure EAS cannot be used without schedutil. This will be done later, once EAS has actually been introduced. Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: adharmap@codeaurora.org Cc: chris.redpath@arm.com Cc: currojerez@riseup.net Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: edubezval@gmail.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: javi.merino@kernel.org Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: pkondeti@codeaurora.org Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: skannan@codeaurora.org Cc: smuckle@google.com Cc: srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com Cc: thara.gopinath@linaro.org Cc: tkjos@google.com Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181203095628.11858-3-quentin.perret@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-12-03 16:56:15 +07:00
freq = map_util_freq(util, freq, max);
if (freq == sg_policy->cached_raw_freq && !sg_policy->need_freq_update)
return sg_policy->next_freq;
sg_policy->need_freq_update = false;
sg_policy->cached_raw_freq = freq;
return cpufreq_driver_resolve_freq(policy, freq);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
}
/*
* This function computes an effective utilization for the given CPU, to be
* used for frequency selection given the linear relation: f = u * f_max.
*
* The scheduler tracks the following metrics:
*
* cpu_util_{cfs,rt,dl,irq}()
* cpu_bw_dl()
*
* Where the cfs,rt and dl util numbers are tracked with the same metric and
* synchronized windows and are thus directly comparable.
*
* The cfs,rt,dl utilization are the running times measured with rq->clock_task
* which excludes things like IRQ and steal-time. These latter are then accrued
* in the irq utilization.
*
* The DL bandwidth number otoh is not a measured metric but a value computed
* based on the task model parameters and gives the minimal utilization
* required to meet deadlines.
*/
sched/uclamp: Add uclamp support to energy_compute() The Energy Aware Scheduler (EAS) estimates the energy impact of waking up a task on a given CPU. This estimation is based on: a) an (active) power consumption defined for each CPU frequency b) an estimation of which frequency will be used on each CPU c) an estimation of the busy time (utilization) of each CPU Utilization clamping can affect both b) and c). A CPU is expected to run: - on an higher than required frequency, but for a shorter time, in case its estimated utilization will be smaller than the minimum utilization enforced by uclamp - on a smaller than required frequency, but for a longer time, in case its estimated utilization is bigger than the maximum utilization enforced by uclamp While compute_energy() already accounts clamping effects on busy time, the clamping effects on frequency selection are currently ignored. Fix it by considering how CPU clamp values will be affected by a task waking up and being RUNNABLE on that CPU. Do that by refactoring schedutil_freq_util() to take an additional task_struct* which allows EAS to evaluate the impact on clamp values of a task being eventually queued in a CPU. Clamp values are applied to the RT+CFS utilization only when a FREQUENCY_UTIL is required by compute_energy(). Do note that switching from ENERGY_UTIL to FREQUENCY_UTIL in the computation of the cpu_util signal implies that we are more likely to estimate the highest OPP when a RT task is running in another CPU of the same performance domain. This can have an impact on energy estimation but: - it's not easy to say which approach is better, since it depends on the use case - the original approach could still be obtained by setting a smaller task-specific util_min whenever required Since we are at that: - rename schedutil_freq_util() into schedutil_cpu_util(), since it's not only used for frequency selection. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com> Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Cc: Rafael J . Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Cc: Steve Muckle <smuckle@google.com> Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190621084217.8167-12-patrick.bellasi@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2019-06-21 15:42:12 +07:00
unsigned long schedutil_cpu_util(int cpu, unsigned long util_cfs,
unsigned long max, enum schedutil_type type,
struct task_struct *p)
{
sched/cpufreq: Prepare schedutil for Energy Aware Scheduling Schedutil requests frequency by aggregating utilization signals from the scheduler (CFS, RT, DL, IRQ) and applying a 25% margin on top of them. Since Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) needs to be able to predict the frequency requests, it needs to forecast the decisions made by the governor. In order to prepare the introduction of EAS, introduce schedutil_freq_util() to centralize the aforementioned signal aggregation and make it available to both schedutil and EAS. Since frequency selection and energy estimation still need to deal with RT and DL signals slightly differently, schedutil_freq_util() is called with a different 'type' parameter in those two contexts, and returns an aggregated utilization signal accordingly. While at it, introduce the map_util_freq() function which is designed to make schedutil's 25% margin usable easily for both sugov and EAS. As EAS will be able to predict schedutil's frequency requests more accurately than any other governor by design, it'd be sensible to make sure EAS cannot be used without schedutil. This will be done later, once EAS has actually been introduced. Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: adharmap@codeaurora.org Cc: chris.redpath@arm.com Cc: currojerez@riseup.net Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: edubezval@gmail.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: javi.merino@kernel.org Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: pkondeti@codeaurora.org Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: skannan@codeaurora.org Cc: smuckle@google.com Cc: srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com Cc: thara.gopinath@linaro.org Cc: tkjos@google.com Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181203095628.11858-3-quentin.perret@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-12-03 16:56:15 +07:00
unsigned long dl_util, util, irq;
struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
sched/cpufreq, sched/uclamp: Add clamps for FAIR and RT tasks Each time a frequency update is required via schedutil, a frequency is selected to (possibly) satisfy the utilization reported by each scheduling class and irqs. However, when utilization clamping is in use, the frequency selection should consider userspace utilization clamping hints. This will allow, for example, to: - boost tasks which are directly affecting the user experience by running them at least at a minimum "requested" frequency - cap low priority tasks not directly affecting the user experience by running them only up to a maximum "allowed" frequency These constraints are meant to support a per-task based tuning of the frequency selection thus supporting a fine grained definition of performance boosting vs energy saving strategies in kernel space. Add support to clamp the utilization of RUNNABLE FAIR and RT tasks within the boundaries defined by their aggregated utilization clamp constraints. Do that by considering the max(min_util, max_util) to give boosted tasks the performance they need even when they happen to be co-scheduled with other capped tasks. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com> Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Cc: Rafael J . Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Cc: Steve Muckle <smuckle@google.com> Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190621084217.8167-10-patrick.bellasi@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2019-06-21 15:42:10 +07:00
if (!IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_UCLAMP_TASK) &&
type == FREQUENCY_UTIL && rt_rq_is_runnable(&rq->rt)) {
return max;
sched/cpufreq, sched/uclamp: Add clamps for FAIR and RT tasks Each time a frequency update is required via schedutil, a frequency is selected to (possibly) satisfy the utilization reported by each scheduling class and irqs. However, when utilization clamping is in use, the frequency selection should consider userspace utilization clamping hints. This will allow, for example, to: - boost tasks which are directly affecting the user experience by running them at least at a minimum "requested" frequency - cap low priority tasks not directly affecting the user experience by running them only up to a maximum "allowed" frequency These constraints are meant to support a per-task based tuning of the frequency selection thus supporting a fine grained definition of performance boosting vs energy saving strategies in kernel space. Add support to clamp the utilization of RUNNABLE FAIR and RT tasks within the boundaries defined by their aggregated utilization clamp constraints. Do that by considering the max(min_util, max_util) to give boosted tasks the performance they need even when they happen to be co-scheduled with other capped tasks. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com> Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Cc: Rafael J . Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Cc: Steve Muckle <smuckle@google.com> Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190621084217.8167-10-patrick.bellasi@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2019-06-21 15:42:10 +07:00
}
/*
* Early check to see if IRQ/steal time saturates the CPU, can be
* because of inaccuracies in how we track these -- see
* update_irq_load_avg().
*/
irq = cpu_util_irq(rq);
if (unlikely(irq >= max))
cpufreq/schedutil: Take time spent in interrupts into account The time spent executing IRQ handlers 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 the following speedup: 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 +9% 8 iterations stdev is lower than 1% Only WFI idle state is enabled (shallowest idle state). Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: claudio@evidence.eu.com Cc: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: luca.abeni@santannapisa.it Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: quentin.perret@arm.com Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1530200714-4504-8-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-06-28 22:45:10 +07:00
return max;
/*
* Because the time spend on RT/DL tasks is visible as 'lost' time to
* CFS tasks and we use the same metric to track the effective
* utilization (PELT windows are synchronized) we can directly add them
* to obtain the CPU's actual utilization.
sched/cpufreq, sched/uclamp: Add clamps for FAIR and RT tasks Each time a frequency update is required via schedutil, a frequency is selected to (possibly) satisfy the utilization reported by each scheduling class and irqs. However, when utilization clamping is in use, the frequency selection should consider userspace utilization clamping hints. This will allow, for example, to: - boost tasks which are directly affecting the user experience by running them at least at a minimum "requested" frequency - cap low priority tasks not directly affecting the user experience by running them only up to a maximum "allowed" frequency These constraints are meant to support a per-task based tuning of the frequency selection thus supporting a fine grained definition of performance boosting vs energy saving strategies in kernel space. Add support to clamp the utilization of RUNNABLE FAIR and RT tasks within the boundaries defined by their aggregated utilization clamp constraints. Do that by considering the max(min_util, max_util) to give boosted tasks the performance they need even when they happen to be co-scheduled with other capped tasks. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com> Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Cc: Rafael J . Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Cc: Steve Muckle <smuckle@google.com> Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190621084217.8167-10-patrick.bellasi@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2019-06-21 15:42:10 +07:00
*
* CFS and RT utilization can be boosted or capped, depending on
* utilization clamp constraints requested by currently RUNNABLE
* tasks.
* When there are no CFS RUNNABLE tasks, clamps are released and
* frequency will be gracefully reduced with the utilization decay.
*/
sched/cpufreq, sched/uclamp: Add clamps for FAIR and RT tasks Each time a frequency update is required via schedutil, a frequency is selected to (possibly) satisfy the utilization reported by each scheduling class and irqs. However, when utilization clamping is in use, the frequency selection should consider userspace utilization clamping hints. This will allow, for example, to: - boost tasks which are directly affecting the user experience by running them at least at a minimum "requested" frequency - cap low priority tasks not directly affecting the user experience by running them only up to a maximum "allowed" frequency These constraints are meant to support a per-task based tuning of the frequency selection thus supporting a fine grained definition of performance boosting vs energy saving strategies in kernel space. Add support to clamp the utilization of RUNNABLE FAIR and RT tasks within the boundaries defined by their aggregated utilization clamp constraints. Do that by considering the max(min_util, max_util) to give boosted tasks the performance they need even when they happen to be co-scheduled with other capped tasks. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com> Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Cc: Rafael J . Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Cc: Steve Muckle <smuckle@google.com> Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190621084217.8167-10-patrick.bellasi@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2019-06-21 15:42:10 +07:00
util = util_cfs + cpu_util_rt(rq);
if (type == FREQUENCY_UTIL)
sched/uclamp: Add uclamp support to energy_compute() The Energy Aware Scheduler (EAS) estimates the energy impact of waking up a task on a given CPU. This estimation is based on: a) an (active) power consumption defined for each CPU frequency b) an estimation of which frequency will be used on each CPU c) an estimation of the busy time (utilization) of each CPU Utilization clamping can affect both b) and c). A CPU is expected to run: - on an higher than required frequency, but for a shorter time, in case its estimated utilization will be smaller than the minimum utilization enforced by uclamp - on a smaller than required frequency, but for a longer time, in case its estimated utilization is bigger than the maximum utilization enforced by uclamp While compute_energy() already accounts clamping effects on busy time, the clamping effects on frequency selection are currently ignored. Fix it by considering how CPU clamp values will be affected by a task waking up and being RUNNABLE on that CPU. Do that by refactoring schedutil_freq_util() to take an additional task_struct* which allows EAS to evaluate the impact on clamp values of a task being eventually queued in a CPU. Clamp values are applied to the RT+CFS utilization only when a FREQUENCY_UTIL is required by compute_energy(). Do note that switching from ENERGY_UTIL to FREQUENCY_UTIL in the computation of the cpu_util signal implies that we are more likely to estimate the highest OPP when a RT task is running in another CPU of the same performance domain. This can have an impact on energy estimation but: - it's not easy to say which approach is better, since it depends on the use case - the original approach could still be obtained by setting a smaller task-specific util_min whenever required Since we are at that: - rename schedutil_freq_util() into schedutil_cpu_util(), since it's not only used for frequency selection. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com> Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Cc: Rafael J . Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Cc: Steve Muckle <smuckle@google.com> Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190621084217.8167-12-patrick.bellasi@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2019-06-21 15:42:12 +07:00
util = uclamp_util_with(rq, util, p);
sched/cpufreq: Prepare schedutil for Energy Aware Scheduling Schedutil requests frequency by aggregating utilization signals from the scheduler (CFS, RT, DL, IRQ) and applying a 25% margin on top of them. Since Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) needs to be able to predict the frequency requests, it needs to forecast the decisions made by the governor. In order to prepare the introduction of EAS, introduce schedutil_freq_util() to centralize the aforementioned signal aggregation and make it available to both schedutil and EAS. Since frequency selection and energy estimation still need to deal with RT and DL signals slightly differently, schedutil_freq_util() is called with a different 'type' parameter in those two contexts, and returns an aggregated utilization signal accordingly. While at it, introduce the map_util_freq() function which is designed to make schedutil's 25% margin usable easily for both sugov and EAS. As EAS will be able to predict schedutil's frequency requests more accurately than any other governor by design, it'd be sensible to make sure EAS cannot be used without schedutil. This will be done later, once EAS has actually been introduced. Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: adharmap@codeaurora.org Cc: chris.redpath@arm.com Cc: currojerez@riseup.net Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: edubezval@gmail.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: javi.merino@kernel.org Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: pkondeti@codeaurora.org Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: skannan@codeaurora.org Cc: smuckle@google.com Cc: srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com Cc: thara.gopinath@linaro.org Cc: tkjos@google.com Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181203095628.11858-3-quentin.perret@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-12-03 16:56:15 +07:00
dl_util = cpu_util_dl(rq);
cpufreq/schedutil: Take time spent in interrupts into account The time spent executing IRQ handlers 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 the following speedup: 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 +9% 8 iterations stdev is lower than 1% Only WFI idle state is enabled (shallowest idle state). Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: claudio@evidence.eu.com Cc: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: luca.abeni@santannapisa.it Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: quentin.perret@arm.com Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1530200714-4504-8-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-06-28 22:45:10 +07:00
/*
sched/cpufreq: Prepare schedutil for Energy Aware Scheduling Schedutil requests frequency by aggregating utilization signals from the scheduler (CFS, RT, DL, IRQ) and applying a 25% margin on top of them. Since Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) needs to be able to predict the frequency requests, it needs to forecast the decisions made by the governor. In order to prepare the introduction of EAS, introduce schedutil_freq_util() to centralize the aforementioned signal aggregation and make it available to both schedutil and EAS. Since frequency selection and energy estimation still need to deal with RT and DL signals slightly differently, schedutil_freq_util() is called with a different 'type' parameter in those two contexts, and returns an aggregated utilization signal accordingly. While at it, introduce the map_util_freq() function which is designed to make schedutil's 25% margin usable easily for both sugov and EAS. As EAS will be able to predict schedutil's frequency requests more accurately than any other governor by design, it'd be sensible to make sure EAS cannot be used without schedutil. This will be done later, once EAS has actually been introduced. Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: adharmap@codeaurora.org Cc: chris.redpath@arm.com Cc: currojerez@riseup.net Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: edubezval@gmail.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: javi.merino@kernel.org Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: pkondeti@codeaurora.org Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: skannan@codeaurora.org Cc: smuckle@google.com Cc: srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com Cc: thara.gopinath@linaro.org Cc: tkjos@google.com Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181203095628.11858-3-quentin.perret@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-12-03 16:56:15 +07:00
* For frequency selection we do not make cpu_util_dl() a permanent part
* of this sum because we want to use cpu_bw_dl() later on, but we need
* to check if the CFS+RT+DL sum is saturated (ie. no idle time) such
* that we select f_max when there is no idle time.
*
* NOTE: numerical errors or stop class might cause us to not quite hit
* saturation when we should -- something for later.
cpufreq/schedutil: Take time spent in interrupts into account The time spent executing IRQ handlers 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 the following speedup: 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 +9% 8 iterations stdev is lower than 1% Only WFI idle state is enabled (shallowest idle state). Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: claudio@evidence.eu.com Cc: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: luca.abeni@santannapisa.it Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: quentin.perret@arm.com Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1530200714-4504-8-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-06-28 22:45:10 +07:00
*/
sched/cpufreq: Prepare schedutil for Energy Aware Scheduling Schedutil requests frequency by aggregating utilization signals from the scheduler (CFS, RT, DL, IRQ) and applying a 25% margin on top of them. Since Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) needs to be able to predict the frequency requests, it needs to forecast the decisions made by the governor. In order to prepare the introduction of EAS, introduce schedutil_freq_util() to centralize the aforementioned signal aggregation and make it available to both schedutil and EAS. Since frequency selection and energy estimation still need to deal with RT and DL signals slightly differently, schedutil_freq_util() is called with a different 'type' parameter in those two contexts, and returns an aggregated utilization signal accordingly. While at it, introduce the map_util_freq() function which is designed to make schedutil's 25% margin usable easily for both sugov and EAS. As EAS will be able to predict schedutil's frequency requests more accurately than any other governor by design, it'd be sensible to make sure EAS cannot be used without schedutil. This will be done later, once EAS has actually been introduced. Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: adharmap@codeaurora.org Cc: chris.redpath@arm.com Cc: currojerez@riseup.net Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: edubezval@gmail.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: javi.merino@kernel.org Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: pkondeti@codeaurora.org Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: skannan@codeaurora.org Cc: smuckle@google.com Cc: srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com Cc: thara.gopinath@linaro.org Cc: tkjos@google.com Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181203095628.11858-3-quentin.perret@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-12-03 16:56:15 +07:00
if (util + dl_util >= max)
cpufreq/schedutil: Take time spent in interrupts into account The time spent executing IRQ handlers 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 the following speedup: 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 +9% 8 iterations stdev is lower than 1% Only WFI idle state is enabled (shallowest idle state). Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: claudio@evidence.eu.com Cc: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: luca.abeni@santannapisa.it Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: quentin.perret@arm.com Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1530200714-4504-8-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-06-28 22:45:10 +07:00
return max;
sched/cpufreq: Prepare schedutil for Energy Aware Scheduling Schedutil requests frequency by aggregating utilization signals from the scheduler (CFS, RT, DL, IRQ) and applying a 25% margin on top of them. Since Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) needs to be able to predict the frequency requests, it needs to forecast the decisions made by the governor. In order to prepare the introduction of EAS, introduce schedutil_freq_util() to centralize the aforementioned signal aggregation and make it available to both schedutil and EAS. Since frequency selection and energy estimation still need to deal with RT and DL signals slightly differently, schedutil_freq_util() is called with a different 'type' parameter in those two contexts, and returns an aggregated utilization signal accordingly. While at it, introduce the map_util_freq() function which is designed to make schedutil's 25% margin usable easily for both sugov and EAS. As EAS will be able to predict schedutil's frequency requests more accurately than any other governor by design, it'd be sensible to make sure EAS cannot be used without schedutil. This will be done later, once EAS has actually been introduced. Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: adharmap@codeaurora.org Cc: chris.redpath@arm.com Cc: currojerez@riseup.net Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: edubezval@gmail.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: javi.merino@kernel.org Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: pkondeti@codeaurora.org Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: skannan@codeaurora.org Cc: smuckle@google.com Cc: srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com Cc: thara.gopinath@linaro.org Cc: tkjos@google.com Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181203095628.11858-3-quentin.perret@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-12-03 16:56:15 +07:00
/*
* OTOH, for energy computation we need the estimated running time, so
* include util_dl and ignore dl_bw.
*/
if (type == ENERGY_UTIL)
util += dl_util;
/*
* There is still idle time; further improve the number by using the
* irq metric. Because IRQ/steal time is hidden from the task clock we
* need to scale the task numbers:
*
* 1 - irq
* U' = irq + ------- * U
* max
*/
util = scale_irq_capacity(util, irq, max);
util += irq;
/*
* Bandwidth required by DEADLINE must always be granted while, for
* FAIR and RT, we use blocked utilization of IDLE CPUs as a mechanism
* to gracefully reduce the frequency when no tasks show up for longer
sched/cpufreq: Modify aggregate utilization to always include blocked FAIR utilization Since the refactoring introduced by: commit 8f111bc357aa ("cpufreq/schedutil: Rewrite CPUFREQ_RT support") we aggregate FAIR utilization only if this class has runnable tasks. This was mainly due to avoid the risk to stay on an high frequency just because of the blocked utilization of a CPU not being properly decayed while the CPU was idle. However, since: commit 31e77c93e432 ("sched/fair: Update blocked load when newly idle") the FAIR blocked utilization is properly decayed also for IDLE CPUs. This allows us to use the FAIR blocked utilization as a safe mechanism to gracefully reduce the frequency only if no FAIR tasks show up on a CPU for a reasonable period of time. Moreover, we also reduce the frequency drops of CPUs running periodic tasks which, depending on the task periodicity and the time required for a frequency switch, was increasing the chances to introduce some undesirable performance variations. Reported-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Tested-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Rafael J . Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Cc: Steve Muckle <smuckle@google.com> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180524141023.13765-2-patrick.bellasi@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-05-24 21:10:22 +07:00
* periods of time.
*
* Ideally we would like to set bw_dl as min/guaranteed freq and util +
* bw_dl as requested freq. However, cpufreq is not yet ready for such
* an interface. So, we only do the latter for now.
*/
sched/cpufreq: Prepare schedutil for Energy Aware Scheduling Schedutil requests frequency by aggregating utilization signals from the scheduler (CFS, RT, DL, IRQ) and applying a 25% margin on top of them. Since Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) needs to be able to predict the frequency requests, it needs to forecast the decisions made by the governor. In order to prepare the introduction of EAS, introduce schedutil_freq_util() to centralize the aforementioned signal aggregation and make it available to both schedutil and EAS. Since frequency selection and energy estimation still need to deal with RT and DL signals slightly differently, schedutil_freq_util() is called with a different 'type' parameter in those two contexts, and returns an aggregated utilization signal accordingly. While at it, introduce the map_util_freq() function which is designed to make schedutil's 25% margin usable easily for both sugov and EAS. As EAS will be able to predict schedutil's frequency requests more accurately than any other governor by design, it'd be sensible to make sure EAS cannot be used without schedutil. This will be done later, once EAS has actually been introduced. Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: adharmap@codeaurora.org Cc: chris.redpath@arm.com Cc: currojerez@riseup.net Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: edubezval@gmail.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: javi.merino@kernel.org Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: pkondeti@codeaurora.org Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: skannan@codeaurora.org Cc: smuckle@google.com Cc: srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com Cc: thara.gopinath@linaro.org Cc: tkjos@google.com Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181203095628.11858-3-quentin.perret@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-12-03 16:56:15 +07:00
if (type == FREQUENCY_UTIL)
util += cpu_bw_dl(rq);
return min(max, util);
}
static unsigned long sugov_get_util(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu)
{
struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(sg_cpu->cpu);
unsigned long util = cpu_util_cfs(rq);
unsigned long max = arch_scale_cpu_capacity(sg_cpu->cpu);
sched/cpufreq: Prepare schedutil for Energy Aware Scheduling Schedutil requests frequency by aggregating utilization signals from the scheduler (CFS, RT, DL, IRQ) and applying a 25% margin on top of them. Since Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) needs to be able to predict the frequency requests, it needs to forecast the decisions made by the governor. In order to prepare the introduction of EAS, introduce schedutil_freq_util() to centralize the aforementioned signal aggregation and make it available to both schedutil and EAS. Since frequency selection and energy estimation still need to deal with RT and DL signals slightly differently, schedutil_freq_util() is called with a different 'type' parameter in those two contexts, and returns an aggregated utilization signal accordingly. While at it, introduce the map_util_freq() function which is designed to make schedutil's 25% margin usable easily for both sugov and EAS. As EAS will be able to predict schedutil's frequency requests more accurately than any other governor by design, it'd be sensible to make sure EAS cannot be used without schedutil. This will be done later, once EAS has actually been introduced. Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: adharmap@codeaurora.org Cc: chris.redpath@arm.com Cc: currojerez@riseup.net Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: edubezval@gmail.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: javi.merino@kernel.org Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: pkondeti@codeaurora.org Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: skannan@codeaurora.org Cc: smuckle@google.com Cc: srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com Cc: thara.gopinath@linaro.org Cc: tkjos@google.com Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181203095628.11858-3-quentin.perret@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-12-03 16:56:15 +07:00
sg_cpu->max = max;
sg_cpu->bw_dl = cpu_bw_dl(rq);
sched/uclamp: Add uclamp support to energy_compute() The Energy Aware Scheduler (EAS) estimates the energy impact of waking up a task on a given CPU. This estimation is based on: a) an (active) power consumption defined for each CPU frequency b) an estimation of which frequency will be used on each CPU c) an estimation of the busy time (utilization) of each CPU Utilization clamping can affect both b) and c). A CPU is expected to run: - on an higher than required frequency, but for a shorter time, in case its estimated utilization will be smaller than the minimum utilization enforced by uclamp - on a smaller than required frequency, but for a longer time, in case its estimated utilization is bigger than the maximum utilization enforced by uclamp While compute_energy() already accounts clamping effects on busy time, the clamping effects on frequency selection are currently ignored. Fix it by considering how CPU clamp values will be affected by a task waking up and being RUNNABLE on that CPU. Do that by refactoring schedutil_freq_util() to take an additional task_struct* which allows EAS to evaluate the impact on clamp values of a task being eventually queued in a CPU. Clamp values are applied to the RT+CFS utilization only when a FREQUENCY_UTIL is required by compute_energy(). Do note that switching from ENERGY_UTIL to FREQUENCY_UTIL in the computation of the cpu_util signal implies that we are more likely to estimate the highest OPP when a RT task is running in another CPU of the same performance domain. This can have an impact on energy estimation but: - it's not easy to say which approach is better, since it depends on the use case - the original approach could still be obtained by setting a smaller task-specific util_min whenever required Since we are at that: - rename schedutil_freq_util() into schedutil_cpu_util(), since it's not only used for frequency selection. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com> Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Cc: Rafael J . Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Cc: Steve Muckle <smuckle@google.com> Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190621084217.8167-12-patrick.bellasi@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2019-06-21 15:42:12 +07:00
return schedutil_cpu_util(sg_cpu->cpu, util, max, FREQUENCY_UTIL, NULL);
}
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
/**
* sugov_iowait_reset() - Reset the IO boost status of a CPU.
* @sg_cpu: the sugov data for the CPU to boost
* @time: the update time from the caller
* @set_iowait_boost: true if an IO boost has been requested
*
* The IO wait boost of a task is disabled after a tick since the last update
* of a CPU. If a new IO wait boost is requested after more then a tick, then
* we enable the boost starting from IOWAIT_BOOST_MIN, which improves energy
* efficiency by ignoring sporadic wakeups from IO.
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
*/
static bool sugov_iowait_reset(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu, u64 time,
bool set_iowait_boost)
{
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
s64 delta_ns = time - sg_cpu->last_update;
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
/* Reset boost only if a tick has elapsed since last request */
if (delta_ns <= TICK_NSEC)
return false;
sg_cpu->iowait_boost = set_iowait_boost ? IOWAIT_BOOST_MIN : 0;
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
sg_cpu->iowait_boost_pending = set_iowait_boost;
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
return true;
}
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
/**
* sugov_iowait_boost() - Updates the IO boost status of a CPU.
* @sg_cpu: the sugov data for the CPU to boost
* @time: the update time from the caller
* @flags: SCHED_CPUFREQ_IOWAIT if the task is waking up after an IO wait
*
* Each time a task wakes up after an IO operation, the CPU utilization can be
* boosted to a certain utilization which doubles at each "frequent and
* successive" wakeup from IO, ranging from IOWAIT_BOOST_MIN to the utilization
* of the maximum OPP.
*
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
* To keep doubling, an IO boost has to be requested at least once per tick,
* otherwise we restart from the utilization of the minimum OPP.
*/
static void sugov_iowait_boost(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu, u64 time,
unsigned int flags)
{
bool set_iowait_boost = flags & SCHED_CPUFREQ_IOWAIT;
/* Reset boost if the CPU appears to have been idle enough */
if (sg_cpu->iowait_boost &&
sugov_iowait_reset(sg_cpu, time, set_iowait_boost))
return;
/* Boost only tasks waking up after IO */
if (!set_iowait_boost)
return;
/* Ensure boost doubles only one time at each request */
if (sg_cpu->iowait_boost_pending)
return;
sg_cpu->iowait_boost_pending = true;
/* Double the boost at each request */
if (sg_cpu->iowait_boost) {
sg_cpu->iowait_boost =
min_t(unsigned int, sg_cpu->iowait_boost << 1, SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE);
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
return;
}
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
/* First wakeup after IO: start with minimum boost */
sg_cpu->iowait_boost = IOWAIT_BOOST_MIN;
}
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
/**
* sugov_iowait_apply() - Apply the IO boost to a CPU.
* @sg_cpu: the sugov data for the cpu to boost
* @time: the update time from the caller
* @util: the utilization to (eventually) boost
* @max: the maximum value the utilization can be boosted to
*
* A CPU running a task which woken up after an IO operation can have its
* utilization boosted to speed up the completion of those IO operations.
* The IO boost value is increased each time a task wakes up from IO, in
* sugov_iowait_apply(), and it's instead decreased by this function,
* each time an increase has not been requested (!iowait_boost_pending).
*
* A CPU which also appears to have been idle for at least one tick has also
* its IO boost utilization reset.
*
* This mechanism is designed to boost high frequently IO waiting tasks, while
* being more conservative on tasks which does sporadic IO operations.
*/
static unsigned long sugov_iowait_apply(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu, u64 time,
unsigned long util, unsigned long max)
{
unsigned long boost;
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
/* No boost currently required */
if (!sg_cpu->iowait_boost)
return util;
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
/* Reset boost if the CPU appears to have been idle enough */
if (sugov_iowait_reset(sg_cpu, time, false))
return util;
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
if (!sg_cpu->iowait_boost_pending) {
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
/*
* No boost pending; reduce the boost value.
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
*/
sg_cpu->iowait_boost >>= 1;
if (sg_cpu->iowait_boost < IOWAIT_BOOST_MIN) {
sg_cpu->iowait_boost = 0;
return util;
}
}
sg_cpu->iowait_boost_pending = false;
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
/*
* @util is already in capacity scale; convert iowait_boost
* into the same scale so we can compare.
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
*/
boost = (sg_cpu->iowait_boost * max) >> SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT;
return max(boost, util);
}
cpufreq: schedutil: Avoid reducing frequency of busy CPUs prematurely The way the schedutil governor uses the PELT metric causes it to underestimate the CPU utilization in some cases. That can be easily demonstrated by running kernel compilation on a Sandy Bridge Intel processor, running turbostat in parallel with it and looking at the values written to the MSR_IA32_PERF_CTL register. Namely, the expected result would be that when all CPUs were 100% busy, all of them would be requested to run in the maximum P-state, but observation shows that this clearly isn't the case. The CPUs run in the maximum P-state for a while and then are requested to run slower and go back to the maximum P-state after a while again. That causes the actual frequency of the processor to visibly oscillate below the sustainable maximum in a jittery fashion which clearly is not desirable. That has been attributed to CPU utilization metric updates on task migration that cause the total utilization value for the CPU to be reduced by the utilization of the migrated task. If that happens, the schedutil governor may see a CPU utilization reduction and will attempt to reduce the CPU frequency accordingly right away. That may be premature, though, for example if the system is generally busy and there are other runnable tasks waiting to be run on that CPU already. This is unlikely to be an issue on systems where cpufreq policies are shared between multiple CPUs, because in those cases the policy utilization is computed as the maximum of the CPU utilization values over the whole policy and if that turns out to be low, reducing the frequency for the policy most likely is a good idea anyway. On systems with one CPU per policy, however, it may affect performance adversely and even lead to increased energy consumption in some cases. On those systems it may be addressed by taking another utilization metric into consideration, like whether or not the CPU whose frequency is about to be reduced has been idle recently, because if that's not the case, the CPU is likely to be busy in the near future and its frequency should not be reduced. To that end, use the counter of idle calls in the timekeeping code. Namely, make the schedutil governor look at that counter for the current CPU every time before its frequency is about to be reduced. If the counter has not changed since the previous iteration of the governor computations for that CPU, the CPU has been busy for all that time and its frequency should not be decreased, so if the new frequency would be lower than the one set previously, the governor will skip the frequency update. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
2017-03-22 06:08:50 +07:00
#ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON
static bool sugov_cpu_is_busy(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu)
{
unsigned long idle_calls = tick_nohz_get_idle_calls_cpu(sg_cpu->cpu);
cpufreq: schedutil: Avoid reducing frequency of busy CPUs prematurely The way the schedutil governor uses the PELT metric causes it to underestimate the CPU utilization in some cases. That can be easily demonstrated by running kernel compilation on a Sandy Bridge Intel processor, running turbostat in parallel with it and looking at the values written to the MSR_IA32_PERF_CTL register. Namely, the expected result would be that when all CPUs were 100% busy, all of them would be requested to run in the maximum P-state, but observation shows that this clearly isn't the case. The CPUs run in the maximum P-state for a while and then are requested to run slower and go back to the maximum P-state after a while again. That causes the actual frequency of the processor to visibly oscillate below the sustainable maximum in a jittery fashion which clearly is not desirable. That has been attributed to CPU utilization metric updates on task migration that cause the total utilization value for the CPU to be reduced by the utilization of the migrated task. If that happens, the schedutil governor may see a CPU utilization reduction and will attempt to reduce the CPU frequency accordingly right away. That may be premature, though, for example if the system is generally busy and there are other runnable tasks waiting to be run on that CPU already. This is unlikely to be an issue on systems where cpufreq policies are shared between multiple CPUs, because in those cases the policy utilization is computed as the maximum of the CPU utilization values over the whole policy and if that turns out to be low, reducing the frequency for the policy most likely is a good idea anyway. On systems with one CPU per policy, however, it may affect performance adversely and even lead to increased energy consumption in some cases. On those systems it may be addressed by taking another utilization metric into consideration, like whether or not the CPU whose frequency is about to be reduced has been idle recently, because if that's not the case, the CPU is likely to be busy in the near future and its frequency should not be reduced. To that end, use the counter of idle calls in the timekeeping code. Namely, make the schedutil governor look at that counter for the current CPU every time before its frequency is about to be reduced. If the counter has not changed since the previous iteration of the governor computations for that CPU, the CPU has been busy for all that time and its frequency should not be decreased, so if the new frequency would be lower than the one set previously, the governor will skip the frequency update. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
2017-03-22 06:08:50 +07:00
bool ret = idle_calls == sg_cpu->saved_idle_calls;
sg_cpu->saved_idle_calls = idle_calls;
return ret;
}
#else
static inline bool sugov_cpu_is_busy(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu) { return false; }
#endif /* CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON */
/*
* Make sugov_should_update_freq() ignore the rate limit when DL
* has increased the utilization.
*/
static inline void ignore_dl_rate_limit(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu, struct sugov_policy *sg_policy)
{
if (cpu_bw_dl(cpu_rq(sg_cpu->cpu)) > sg_cpu->bw_dl)
sg_policy->limits_changed = true;
}
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
static void sugov_update_single(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time,
unsigned int flags)
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
{
struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu = container_of(hook, struct sugov_cpu, update_util);
struct sugov_policy *sg_policy = sg_cpu->sg_policy;
unsigned long util, max;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
unsigned int next_f;
cpufreq: schedutil: Avoid reducing frequency of busy CPUs prematurely The way the schedutil governor uses the PELT metric causes it to underestimate the CPU utilization in some cases. That can be easily demonstrated by running kernel compilation on a Sandy Bridge Intel processor, running turbostat in parallel with it and looking at the values written to the MSR_IA32_PERF_CTL register. Namely, the expected result would be that when all CPUs were 100% busy, all of them would be requested to run in the maximum P-state, but observation shows that this clearly isn't the case. The CPUs run in the maximum P-state for a while and then are requested to run slower and go back to the maximum P-state after a while again. That causes the actual frequency of the processor to visibly oscillate below the sustainable maximum in a jittery fashion which clearly is not desirable. That has been attributed to CPU utilization metric updates on task migration that cause the total utilization value for the CPU to be reduced by the utilization of the migrated task. If that happens, the schedutil governor may see a CPU utilization reduction and will attempt to reduce the CPU frequency accordingly right away. That may be premature, though, for example if the system is generally busy and there are other runnable tasks waiting to be run on that CPU already. This is unlikely to be an issue on systems where cpufreq policies are shared between multiple CPUs, because in those cases the policy utilization is computed as the maximum of the CPU utilization values over the whole policy and if that turns out to be low, reducing the frequency for the policy most likely is a good idea anyway. On systems with one CPU per policy, however, it may affect performance adversely and even lead to increased energy consumption in some cases. On those systems it may be addressed by taking another utilization metric into consideration, like whether or not the CPU whose frequency is about to be reduced has been idle recently, because if that's not the case, the CPU is likely to be busy in the near future and its frequency should not be reduced. To that end, use the counter of idle calls in the timekeeping code. Namely, make the schedutil governor look at that counter for the current CPU every time before its frequency is about to be reduced. If the counter has not changed since the previous iteration of the governor computations for that CPU, the CPU has been busy for all that time and its frequency should not be decreased, so if the new frequency would be lower than the one set previously, the governor will skip the frequency update. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
2017-03-22 06:08:50 +07:00
bool busy;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
sugov_iowait_boost(sg_cpu, time, flags);
sg_cpu->last_update = time;
ignore_dl_rate_limit(sg_cpu, sg_policy);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
if (!sugov_should_update_freq(sg_policy, time))
return;
/* Limits may have changed, don't skip frequency update */
busy = !sg_policy->need_freq_update && sugov_cpu_is_busy(sg_cpu);
cpufreq: schedutil: Avoid reducing frequency of busy CPUs prematurely The way the schedutil governor uses the PELT metric causes it to underestimate the CPU utilization in some cases. That can be easily demonstrated by running kernel compilation on a Sandy Bridge Intel processor, running turbostat in parallel with it and looking at the values written to the MSR_IA32_PERF_CTL register. Namely, the expected result would be that when all CPUs were 100% busy, all of them would be requested to run in the maximum P-state, but observation shows that this clearly isn't the case. The CPUs run in the maximum P-state for a while and then are requested to run slower and go back to the maximum P-state after a while again. That causes the actual frequency of the processor to visibly oscillate below the sustainable maximum in a jittery fashion which clearly is not desirable. That has been attributed to CPU utilization metric updates on task migration that cause the total utilization value for the CPU to be reduced by the utilization of the migrated task. If that happens, the schedutil governor may see a CPU utilization reduction and will attempt to reduce the CPU frequency accordingly right away. That may be premature, though, for example if the system is generally busy and there are other runnable tasks waiting to be run on that CPU already. This is unlikely to be an issue on systems where cpufreq policies are shared between multiple CPUs, because in those cases the policy utilization is computed as the maximum of the CPU utilization values over the whole policy and if that turns out to be low, reducing the frequency for the policy most likely is a good idea anyway. On systems with one CPU per policy, however, it may affect performance adversely and even lead to increased energy consumption in some cases. On those systems it may be addressed by taking another utilization metric into consideration, like whether or not the CPU whose frequency is about to be reduced has been idle recently, because if that's not the case, the CPU is likely to be busy in the near future and its frequency should not be reduced. To that end, use the counter of idle calls in the timekeeping code. Namely, make the schedutil governor look at that counter for the current CPU every time before its frequency is about to be reduced. If the counter has not changed since the previous iteration of the governor computations for that CPU, the CPU has been busy for all that time and its frequency should not be decreased, so if the new frequency would be lower than the one set previously, the governor will skip the frequency update. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
2017-03-22 06:08:50 +07:00
util = sugov_get_util(sg_cpu);
max = sg_cpu->max;
util = sugov_iowait_apply(sg_cpu, time, util, max);
next_f = get_next_freq(sg_policy, util, max);
/*
* 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) {
next_f = sg_policy->next_freq;
/* Reset cached freq as next_freq has changed */
sg_policy->cached_raw_freq = 0;
}
/*
* This code runs under rq->lock for the target CPU, so it won't run
* concurrently on two different CPUs for the same target and it is not
* necessary to acquire the lock in the fast switch case.
*/
if (sg_policy->policy->fast_switch_enabled) {
sugov_fast_switch(sg_policy, time, next_f);
} else {
raw_spin_lock(&sg_policy->update_lock);
sugov_deferred_update(sg_policy, time, next_f);
raw_spin_unlock(&sg_policy->update_lock);
}
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
}
cpufreq: schedutil: use now as reference when aggregating shared policy requests Currently, sugov_next_freq_shared() uses last_freq_update_time as a reference to decide when to start considering CPU contributions as stale. However, since last_freq_update_time is set by the last CPU that issued a frequency transition, this might cause problems in certain cases. In practice, the detection of stale utilization values fails whenever the CPU with such values was the last to update the policy. For example (and please note again that the SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT flag is not the problem here, but only the detection of after how much time that flag has to be considered stale), suppose a policy with 2 CPUs: CPU0 | CPU1 | | RT task scheduled | SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT is set | CPU1->last_update = now | freq transition to max | last_freq_update_time = now | more than TICK_NSEC nsecs | a small CFS wakes up | CPU0->last_update = now1 | delta_ns(CPU0) < TICK_NSEC* | CPU0's util is considered | delta_ns(CPU1) = | last_freq_update_time - | CPU1->last_update = 0 | < TICK_NSEC | CPU1 is still considered | CPU1->SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT is set | we stay at max (until CPU1 | exits from idle) | * delta_ns is actually negative as now1 > last_freq_update_time While last_freq_update_time is a sensible reference for rate limiting, it doesn't seem to be useful for working around stale CPU states. Fix the problem by always considering now (time) as the reference for deciding when CPUs have stale contributions. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> Acked-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2017-05-03 20:30:48 +07:00
static unsigned int sugov_next_freq_shared(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu, u64 time)
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
{
struct sugov_policy *sg_policy = sg_cpu->sg_policy;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
struct cpufreq_policy *policy = sg_policy->policy;
unsigned long util = 0, max = 1;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
unsigned int j;
for_each_cpu(j, policy->cpus) {
struct sugov_cpu *j_sg_cpu = &per_cpu(sugov_cpu, j);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
unsigned long j_util, j_max;
j_util = sugov_get_util(j_sg_cpu);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
j_max = j_sg_cpu->max;
j_util = sugov_iowait_apply(j_sg_cpu, time, j_util, j_max);
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
if (j_util * max > j_max * util) {
util = j_util;
max = j_max;
}
}
return get_next_freq(sg_policy, util, max);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
}
static void
sugov_update_shared(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time, unsigned int flags)
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
{
struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu = container_of(hook, struct sugov_cpu, update_util);
struct sugov_policy *sg_policy = sg_cpu->sg_policy;
unsigned int next_f;
raw_spin_lock(&sg_policy->update_lock);
cpufreq: schedutil: Cleanup and document iowait boost The iowait boosting code has been recently updated to add a progressive boosting behavior which allows to be less aggressive in boosting tasks doing only sporadic IO operations, thus being more energy efficient for example on mobile platforms. The current code is now however a bit convoluted. Some functionalities (e.g. iowait boost reset) are replicated in different paths and their documentation is slightly misaligned. Let's cleanup the code by consolidating all the IO wait boosting related functionality within within few dedicated functions and better define their role: - sugov_iowait_boost: set/increase the IO wait boost of a CPU - sugov_iowait_apply: apply/reduce the IO wait boost of a CPU Both these two function are used at every sugov update and they make use of a unified IO wait boost reset policy provided by: - sugov_iowait_reset: reset/disable the IO wait boost of a CPU if a CPU is not updated for more then one tick This makes possible a cleaner and more self-contained design for the IO wait boosting code since the rest of the sugov update routines, both for single and shared frequency domains, follow the same template: /* Configure IO boost, if required */ sugov_iowait_boost() /* Return here if freq change is in progress or throttled */ /* Collect and aggregate utilization information */ sugov_get_util() sugov_aggregate_util() /* * Add IO boost, if currently enabled, on top of the aggregated * utilization value */ sugov_iowait_apply() As a extra bonus, let's also add the documentation for the new functions and better align the in-code documentation. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-22 18:07:54 +07:00
sugov_iowait_boost(sg_cpu, time, flags);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
sg_cpu->last_update = time;
ignore_dl_rate_limit(sg_cpu, sg_policy);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
if (sugov_should_update_freq(sg_policy, time)) {
next_f = sugov_next_freq_shared(sg_cpu, time);
if (sg_policy->policy->fast_switch_enabled)
sugov_fast_switch(sg_policy, time, next_f);
else
sugov_deferred_update(sg_policy, time, next_f);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
}
raw_spin_unlock(&sg_policy->update_lock);
}
static void sugov_work(struct kthread_work *work)
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
{
struct sugov_policy *sg_policy = container_of(work, struct sugov_policy, work);
unsigned int freq;
unsigned long flags;
/*
* Hold sg_policy->update_lock shortly to handle the case where:
* incase sg_policy->next_freq is read here, and then updated by
* sugov_deferred_update() just before work_in_progress is set to false
* here, we may miss queueing the new update.
*
* Note: If a work was queued after the update_lock is released,
* sugov_work() will just be called again by kthread_work code; and the
* request will be proceed before the sugov thread sleeps.
*/
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&sg_policy->update_lock, flags);
freq = sg_policy->next_freq;
sg_policy->work_in_progress = false;
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sg_policy->update_lock, flags);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
mutex_lock(&sg_policy->work_lock);
__cpufreq_driver_target(sg_policy->policy, freq, CPUFREQ_RELATION_L);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
mutex_unlock(&sg_policy->work_lock);
}
static void sugov_irq_work(struct irq_work *irq_work)
{
struct sugov_policy *sg_policy;
sg_policy = container_of(irq_work, struct sugov_policy, irq_work);
kthread_queue_work(&sg_policy->worker, &sg_policy->work);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
}
/************************** sysfs interface ************************/
static struct sugov_tunables *global_tunables;
static DEFINE_MUTEX(global_tunables_lock);
static inline struct sugov_tunables *to_sugov_tunables(struct gov_attr_set *attr_set)
{
return container_of(attr_set, struct sugov_tunables, attr_set);
}
static ssize_t rate_limit_us_show(struct gov_attr_set *attr_set, char *buf)
{
struct sugov_tunables *tunables = to_sugov_tunables(attr_set);
return sprintf(buf, "%u\n", tunables->rate_limit_us);
}
static ssize_t
rate_limit_us_store(struct gov_attr_set *attr_set, const char *buf, size_t count)
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
{
struct sugov_tunables *tunables = to_sugov_tunables(attr_set);
struct sugov_policy *sg_policy;
unsigned int rate_limit_us;
if (kstrtouint(buf, 10, &rate_limit_us))
return -EINVAL;
tunables->rate_limit_us = rate_limit_us;
list_for_each_entry(sg_policy, &attr_set->policy_list, tunables_hook)
sg_policy->freq_update_delay_ns = rate_limit_us * NSEC_PER_USEC;
return count;
}
static struct governor_attr rate_limit_us = __ATTR_RW(rate_limit_us);
static struct attribute *sugov_attrs[] = {
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
&rate_limit_us.attr,
NULL
};
ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(sugov);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
static struct kobj_type sugov_tunables_ktype = {
.default_groups = sugov_groups,
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
.sysfs_ops = &governor_sysfs_ops,
};
/********************** cpufreq governor interface *********************/
sched/topology: Make Energy Aware Scheduling depend on schedutil Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) is designed with the assumption that frequencies of CPUs follow their utilization value. When using a CPUFreq governor other than schedutil, the chances of this assumption being true are small, if any. When schedutil is being used, EAS' predictions are at least consistent with the frequency requests. Although those requests have no guarantees to be honored by the hardware, they should at least guide DVFS in the right direction and provide some hope in regards to the EAS model being accurate. To make sure EAS is only used in a sane configuration, create a strong dependency on schedutil being used. Since having sugov compiled-in does not provide that guarantee, make CPUFreq call a scheduler function on governor changes hence letting it rebuild the scheduling domains, check the governors of the online CPUs, and enable/disable EAS accordingly. Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: adharmap@codeaurora.org Cc: chris.redpath@arm.com Cc: currojerez@riseup.net Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: edubezval@gmail.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: javi.merino@kernel.org Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: pkondeti@codeaurora.org Cc: skannan@codeaurora.org Cc: smuckle@google.com Cc: srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com Cc: thara.gopinath@linaro.org Cc: tkjos@google.com Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181203095628.11858-9-quentin.perret@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-12-03 16:56:21 +07:00
struct cpufreq_governor schedutil_gov;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
static struct sugov_policy *sugov_policy_alloc(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
struct sugov_policy *sg_policy;
sg_policy = kzalloc(sizeof(*sg_policy), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!sg_policy)
return NULL;
sg_policy->policy = policy;
raw_spin_lock_init(&sg_policy->update_lock);
return sg_policy;
}
static void sugov_policy_free(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy)
{
kfree(sg_policy);
}
static int sugov_kthread_create(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy)
{
struct task_struct *thread;
struct sched_attr attr = {
.size = sizeof(struct sched_attr),
.sched_policy = SCHED_DEADLINE,
.sched_flags = SCHED_FLAG_SUGOV,
.sched_nice = 0,
.sched_priority = 0,
/*
* Fake (unused) bandwidth; workaround to "fix"
* priority inheritance.
*/
.sched_runtime = 1000000,
.sched_deadline = 10000000,
.sched_period = 10000000,
};
struct cpufreq_policy *policy = sg_policy->policy;
int ret;
/* kthread only required for slow path */
if (policy->fast_switch_enabled)
return 0;
kthread_init_work(&sg_policy->work, sugov_work);
kthread_init_worker(&sg_policy->worker);
thread = kthread_create(kthread_worker_fn, &sg_policy->worker,
"sugov:%d",
cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus));
if (IS_ERR(thread)) {
pr_err("failed to create sugov thread: %ld\n", PTR_ERR(thread));
return PTR_ERR(thread);
}
ret = sched_setattr_nocheck(thread, &attr);
if (ret) {
kthread_stop(thread);
pr_warn("%s: failed to set SCHED_DEADLINE\n", __func__);
return ret;
}
sg_policy->thread = thread;
Revert "cpufreq: schedutil: Don't restrict kthread to related_cpus unnecessarily" This reverts commit e2cabe48c20efb174ce0c01190f8b9c5f3ea1d13. Lifting the restriction that the sugov kthread is bound to the policy->related_cpus for a system with a slow switching cpufreq driver, which is able to perform DVFS from any cpu (e.g. cpufreq-dt), is not only not beneficial it also harms Enery-Aware Scheduling (EAS) on systems with asymmetric cpu capacities (e.g. Arm big.LITTLE). The sugov kthread which does the update for the little cpus could potentially run on a big cpu. It could prevent that the big cluster goes into deeper idle states although all the tasks are running on the little cluster. Example: hikey960 w/ 4.16.0-rc6-+ Arm big.LITTLE with per-cluster DVFS root@h960:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep "^CPU part" CPU part : 0xd03 (Cortex-A53, little cpu) CPU part : 0xd03 CPU part : 0xd03 CPU part : 0xd03 CPU part : 0xd09 (Cortex-A73, big cpu) CPU part : 0xd09 CPU part : 0xd09 CPU part : 0xd09 root@h960:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq# ls policy0 policy4 schedutil root@h960:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq# cat policy*/related_cpus 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (1) w/o the revert: root@h960:~# ps -eo pid,class,rtprio,pri,psr,comm | awk 'NR == 1 || /sugov/' PID CLS RTPRIO PRI PSR COMMAND 1489 #6 0 140 1 sugov:0 1490 #6 0 140 0 sugov:4 The sugov kthread sugov:4 responsible for policy4 runs on cpu0. (In this case both sugov kthreads run on little cpus). cross policy (cluster) remote callback example: ... migration/1-14 [001] enqueue_task_fair: this_cpu=1 cpu_of(rq)=5 migration/1-14 [001] sugov_update_shared: this_cpu=1 sg_cpu->cpu=5 sg_cpu->sg_policy->policy->related_cpus=4-7 sugov:4-1490 [000] sugov_work: this_cpu=0 sg_cpu->sg_policy->policy->related_cpus=4-7 ... The remote callback (this_cpu=1, target_cpu=5) is executed on cpu=0. (2) w/ the revert: root@h960:~# ps -eo pid,class,rtprio,pri,psr,comm | awk 'NR == 1 || /sugov/' PID CLS RTPRIO PRI PSR COMMAND 1491 #6 0 140 2 sugov:0 1492 #6 0 140 4 sugov:4 The sugov kthread sugov:4 responsible for policy4 runs on cpu4. cross policy (cluster) remote callback example: ... migration/1-14 [001] enqueue_task_fair: this_cpu=1 cpu_of(rq)=7 migration/1-14 [001] sugov_update_shared: this_cpu=1 sg_cpu->cpu=7 sg_cpu->sg_policy->policy->related_cpus=4-7 sugov:4-1492 [004] sugov_work: this_cpu=4 sg_cpu->sg_policy->policy->related_cpus=4-7 ... The remote callback (this_cpu=1, target_cpu=7) is executed on cpu=4. Now the sugov kthread executes again on the policy (cluster) for which the Operating Performance Point (OPP) should be changed. It avoids the problem that an otherwise idle policy (cluster) is running schedutil (the sugov kthread) for another one. Signed-off-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2018-05-08 14:33:40 +07:00
kthread_bind_mask(thread, policy->related_cpus);
init_irq_work(&sg_policy->irq_work, sugov_irq_work);
mutex_init(&sg_policy->work_lock);
wake_up_process(thread);
return 0;
}
static void sugov_kthread_stop(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy)
{
/* kthread only required for slow path */
if (sg_policy->policy->fast_switch_enabled)
return;
kthread_flush_worker(&sg_policy->worker);
kthread_stop(sg_policy->thread);
mutex_destroy(&sg_policy->work_lock);
}
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
static struct sugov_tunables *sugov_tunables_alloc(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy)
{
struct sugov_tunables *tunables;
tunables = kzalloc(sizeof(*tunables), GFP_KERNEL);
if (tunables) {
gov_attr_set_init(&tunables->attr_set, &sg_policy->tunables_hook);
if (!have_governor_per_policy())
global_tunables = tunables;
}
return tunables;
}
static void sugov_tunables_free(struct sugov_tunables *tunables)
{
if (!have_governor_per_policy())
global_tunables = NULL;
kfree(tunables);
}
static int sugov_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
struct sugov_policy *sg_policy;
struct sugov_tunables *tunables;
int ret = 0;
/* State should be equivalent to EXIT */
if (policy->governor_data)
return -EBUSY;
cpufreq_enable_fast_switch(policy);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
sg_policy = sugov_policy_alloc(policy);
if (!sg_policy) {
ret = -ENOMEM;
goto disable_fast_switch;
}
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
ret = sugov_kthread_create(sg_policy);
if (ret)
goto free_sg_policy;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
mutex_lock(&global_tunables_lock);
if (global_tunables) {
if (WARN_ON(have_governor_per_policy())) {
ret = -EINVAL;
goto stop_kthread;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
}
policy->governor_data = sg_policy;
sg_policy->tunables = global_tunables;
gov_attr_set_get(&global_tunables->attr_set, &sg_policy->tunables_hook);
goto out;
}
tunables = sugov_tunables_alloc(sg_policy);
if (!tunables) {
ret = -ENOMEM;
goto stop_kthread;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
}
tunables->rate_limit_us = cpufreq_policy_transition_delay_us(policy);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
policy->governor_data = sg_policy;
sg_policy->tunables = tunables;
ret = kobject_init_and_add(&tunables->attr_set.kobj, &sugov_tunables_ktype,
get_governor_parent_kobj(policy), "%s",
schedutil_gov.name);
if (ret)
goto fail;
out:
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
mutex_unlock(&global_tunables_lock);
return 0;
fail:
kobject_put(&tunables->attr_set.kobj);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
policy->governor_data = NULL;
sugov_tunables_free(tunables);
stop_kthread:
sugov_kthread_stop(sg_policy);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
mutex_unlock(&global_tunables_lock);
free_sg_policy:
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
sugov_policy_free(sg_policy);
disable_fast_switch:
cpufreq_disable_fast_switch(policy);
pr_err("initialization failed (error %d)\n", ret);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
return ret;
}
static void sugov_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
{
struct sugov_policy *sg_policy = policy->governor_data;
struct sugov_tunables *tunables = sg_policy->tunables;
unsigned int count;
mutex_lock(&global_tunables_lock);
count = gov_attr_set_put(&tunables->attr_set, &sg_policy->tunables_hook);
policy->governor_data = NULL;
if (!count)
sugov_tunables_free(tunables);
mutex_unlock(&global_tunables_lock);
sugov_kthread_stop(sg_policy);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
sugov_policy_free(sg_policy);
cpufreq_disable_fast_switch(policy);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
}
static int sugov_start(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
struct sugov_policy *sg_policy = policy->governor_data;
unsigned int cpu;
sg_policy->freq_update_delay_ns = sg_policy->tunables->rate_limit_us * NSEC_PER_USEC;
sg_policy->last_freq_update_time = 0;
sg_policy->next_freq = 0;
sg_policy->work_in_progress = false;
sg_policy->limits_changed = false;
sg_policy->need_freq_update = false;
sg_policy->cached_raw_freq = 0;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
for_each_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus) {
struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu = &per_cpu(sugov_cpu, cpu);
memset(sg_cpu, 0, sizeof(*sg_cpu));
sg_cpu->cpu = cpu;
sg_cpu->sg_policy = sg_policy;
}
for_each_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus) {
struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu = &per_cpu(sugov_cpu, cpu);
cpufreq_add_update_util_hook(cpu, &sg_cpu->update_util,
policy_is_shared(policy) ?
sugov_update_shared :
sugov_update_single);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
}
return 0;
}
static void sugov_stop(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
{
struct sugov_policy *sg_policy = policy->governor_data;
unsigned int cpu;
for_each_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus)
cpufreq_remove_update_util_hook(cpu);
synchronize_rcu();
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
if (!policy->fast_switch_enabled) {
irq_work_sync(&sg_policy->irq_work);
kthread_cancel_work_sync(&sg_policy->work);
}
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
}
static void sugov_limits(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
{
struct sugov_policy *sg_policy = policy->governor_data;
if (!policy->fast_switch_enabled) {
mutex_lock(&sg_policy->work_lock);
cpufreq_policy_apply_limits(policy);
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
mutex_unlock(&sg_policy->work_lock);
}
sg_policy->limits_changed = true;
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
}
sched/topology: Make Energy Aware Scheduling depend on schedutil Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) is designed with the assumption that frequencies of CPUs follow their utilization value. When using a CPUFreq governor other than schedutil, the chances of this assumption being true are small, if any. When schedutil is being used, EAS' predictions are at least consistent with the frequency requests. Although those requests have no guarantees to be honored by the hardware, they should at least guide DVFS in the right direction and provide some hope in regards to the EAS model being accurate. To make sure EAS is only used in a sane configuration, create a strong dependency on schedutil being used. Since having sugov compiled-in does not provide that guarantee, make CPUFreq call a scheduler function on governor changes hence letting it rebuild the scheduling domains, check the governors of the online CPUs, and enable/disable EAS accordingly. Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: adharmap@codeaurora.org Cc: chris.redpath@arm.com Cc: currojerez@riseup.net Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: edubezval@gmail.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: javi.merino@kernel.org Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: pkondeti@codeaurora.org Cc: skannan@codeaurora.org Cc: smuckle@google.com Cc: srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com Cc: thara.gopinath@linaro.org Cc: tkjos@google.com Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181203095628.11858-9-quentin.perret@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-12-03 16:56:21 +07:00
struct cpufreq_governor schedutil_gov = {
.name = "schedutil",
.owner = THIS_MODULE,
.dynamic_switching = true,
.init = sugov_init,
.exit = sugov_exit,
.start = sugov_start,
.stop = sugov_stop,
.limits = sugov_limits,
cpufreq: schedutil: New governor based on scheduler utilization data Add a new cpufreq scaling governor, called "schedutil", that uses scheduler-provided CPU utilization information as input for making its decisions. Doing that is possible after commit 34e2c555f3e1 (cpufreq: Add mechanism for registering utilization update callbacks) that introduced cpufreq_update_util() called by the scheduler on utilization changes (from CFS) and RT/DL task status updates. In particular, CPU frequency scaling decisions may be based on the the utilization data passed to cpufreq_update_util() by CFS. The new governor is relatively simple. The frequency selection formula used by it depends on whether or not the utilization is frequency-invariant. In the frequency-invariant case the new CPU frequency is given by next_freq = 1.25 * max_freq * util / max where util and max are the last two arguments of cpufreq_update_util(). In turn, if util is not frequency-invariant, the maximum frequency in the above formula is replaced with the current frequency of the CPU: next_freq = 1.25 * curr_freq * util / max The coefficient 1.25 corresponds to the frequency tipping point at (util / max) = 0.8. All of the computations are carried out in the utilization update handlers provided by the new governor. One of those handlers is used for cpufreq policies shared between multiple CPUs and the other one is for policies with one CPU only (and therefore it doesn't need to use any extra synchronization means). The governor supports fast frequency switching if that is supported by the cpufreq driver in use and possible for the given policy. In the fast switching case, all operations of the governor take place in its utilization update handlers. If fast switching cannot be used, the frequency switch operations are carried out with the help of a work item which only calls __cpufreq_driver_target() (under a mutex) to trigger a frequency update (to a value already computed beforehand in one of the utilization update handlers). Currently, the governor treats all of the RT and DL tasks as "unknown utilization" and sets the frequency to the allowed maximum when updated from the RT or DL sched classes. That heavy-handed approach should be replaced with something more subtle and specifically targeted at RT and DL tasks. The governor shares some tunables management code with the "ondemand" and "conservative" governors and uses some common definitions from cpufreq_governor.h, but apart from that it is stand-alone. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
2016-04-02 06:09:12 +07:00
};
#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_SCHEDUTIL
struct cpufreq_governor *cpufreq_default_governor(void)
{
return &schedutil_gov;
}
#endif
static int __init sugov_register(void)
{
return cpufreq_register_governor(&schedutil_gov);
}
fs_initcall(sugov_register);
sched/topology: Make Energy Aware Scheduling depend on schedutil Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) is designed with the assumption that frequencies of CPUs follow their utilization value. When using a CPUFreq governor other than schedutil, the chances of this assumption being true are small, if any. When schedutil is being used, EAS' predictions are at least consistent with the frequency requests. Although those requests have no guarantees to be honored by the hardware, they should at least guide DVFS in the right direction and provide some hope in regards to the EAS model being accurate. To make sure EAS is only used in a sane configuration, create a strong dependency on schedutil being used. Since having sugov compiled-in does not provide that guarantee, make CPUFreq call a scheduler function on governor changes hence letting it rebuild the scheduling domains, check the governors of the online CPUs, and enable/disable EAS accordingly. Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: adharmap@codeaurora.org Cc: chris.redpath@arm.com Cc: currojerez@riseup.net Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: edubezval@gmail.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: javi.merino@kernel.org Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: pkondeti@codeaurora.org Cc: skannan@codeaurora.org Cc: smuckle@google.com Cc: srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com Cc: thara.gopinath@linaro.org Cc: tkjos@google.com Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181203095628.11858-9-quentin.perret@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-12-03 16:56:21 +07:00
#ifdef CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL
extern bool sched_energy_update;
extern struct mutex sched_energy_mutex;
static void rebuild_sd_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
{
mutex_lock(&sched_energy_mutex);
sched_energy_update = true;
rebuild_sched_domains();
sched_energy_update = false;
mutex_unlock(&sched_energy_mutex);
}
static DECLARE_WORK(rebuild_sd_work, rebuild_sd_workfn);
/*
* EAS shouldn't be attempted without sugov, so rebuild the sched_domains
* on governor changes to make sure the scheduler knows about it.
*/
void sched_cpufreq_governor_change(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
struct cpufreq_governor *old_gov)
{
if (old_gov == &schedutil_gov || policy->governor == &schedutil_gov) {
/*
* When called from the cpufreq_register_driver() path, the
* cpu_hotplug_lock is already held, so use a work item to
* avoid nested locking in rebuild_sched_domains().
*/
schedule_work(&rebuild_sd_work);
}
}
#endif