lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Nov]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v9 13/15] sched/fair: Introduce an energy estimation helper function
On Wednesday 21 Nov 2018 at 15:28:03 (+0100), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 02:18:55PM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > +static long
> > +compute_energy(struct task_struct *p, int dst_cpu, struct perf_domain *pd)
> > +{
> > + long util, max_util, sum_util, energy = 0;
> > + int cpu;
> > +
> > + for (; pd; pd = pd->next) {
> > + max_util = sum_util = 0;
> > + /*
> > + * The capacity state of CPUs of the current rd can be driven by
> > + * CPUs of another rd if they belong to the same performance
> > + * domain. So, account for the utilization of these CPUs too
> > + * by masking pd with cpu_online_mask instead of the rd span.
> > + *
> > + * If an entire performance domain is outside of the current rd,
> > + * it will not appear in its pd list and will not be accounted
> > + * by compute_energy().
> > + */
> > + for_each_cpu_and(cpu, perf_domain_span(pd), cpu_online_mask) {
>
> Should that not be cpu_active_mask ?

Hmm, I must admit I'm sometimes a bit confused by the exact difference
between these masks, so maybe yeah ...

IIUC, cpu_active_mask is basically the set of CPUs on which the
scheduler is actually allowed to migrate tasks. Is that correct ?

I have always seen cpu_online_mask as a superset of cpu_active_mask
which can also include CPUs which are still running 'special' tasks
(kthreads and things like that I assume) although not allowed for
migration any more (or not yet) because we're in the process of
hotplugging that CPU.

So, the thing is, I'm not trying to select a CPU candidate for my task
here, I'm trying to understand what's the energy impact of a migration.
That involves all CPUs that are running _something_ in a perf domain
no matter if they're allowed to run more tasks or not. I mean, raising
the OPP will make running online && !active CPUs more expensive as well.
That's why I thought cpu_online_mask was good match here.

Or maybe I'm confused again :-)

>
> > + util = cpu_util_next(cpu, p, dst_cpu);
> > + util = schedutil_energy_util(cpu, util);
> > + max_util = max(util, max_util);
> > + sum_util += util;
> > + }
> > +
> > + energy += em_pd_energy(pd->em_pd, max_util, sum_util);
> > + }
> > +
> > + return energy;
> > +}

Thanks,
Quentin

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-11-21 17:07    [W:0.090 / U:1.448 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site