[PATCH 2/6] drivers base/arch_topology: frequency-invariant load-tracking support
From: viresh.kumar@linaro.org (Viresh Kumar)
Date: 2017-06-22 04:06:48
Also in:
linux-pm, lkml
On 21-06-17, 17:57, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
It is true that this patch relies on the notifiers, but I don't see how that prevents us from adding a non-notifier based solution for fast-switch enabled platforms later?
No it doesn't, but I thought it would be better to have a single solution (if possible) for all the cases here.
quoted
I think this patch doesn't really need to go down the notifiers way. We can do something like this in the implementation of topology_get_freq_scale(): return (policy->cur << SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT) / max; Though, we would be required to take care of policy structure in this case somehow.This is exactly what this patch implements. Unfortunately we can't be sure that there is a valid policy data structure where we can read the information from.
Actually there is a way around that.
- Revert one of my patches:
commit f9f41e3ef99a ("cpufreq: Remove policy create/remove notifiers")
- Use those notifiers in init_cpu_capacity_callback() instead of
CPUFREQ_NOTIFY and set/reset a local policy pointer.
- And this pointer we can use safely/reliably in
topology_get_freq_scale(). We may need to use RCU read side
protection in topology_get_freq_scale() though, to make sure the
local policy pointer isn't getting updated simultaneously.
- If the policy pointer isn't set, then we can use
SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE value instead.
Isn't the policy protected by a lock as well?
There are locks, but you don't need any to read policy->cur.
Another thing is that I don't think a transition notifier based solution or any other solution based on the cur/max ratio is really the right way to go for fast-switching platforms. If we can do very frequent frequency switching it makes less sense to use the current ratio whenever we update the PELT averages as the frequency might have changed multiple times since the last update. So it would make more sense to have an average ratio instead.
If the platform has HW counters (e.g. APERF/MPERF) that can provide the ratio then we should of course use those, if not, one solution could be to let cpufreq track the average frequency for each cpu over a suitable time window (around one sched period I think). It should be fairly low overhead to maintain. In the topology driver, we would then choose whether the scaling factor is provided by the cpufreq average frequency ratio or the current transition notifier based approach based on the capabilities of the platform.
Hmm, maybe. -- viresh