lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] schedutil: Allow cpufreq requests to be made even when kthread kicked
On 18-May 11:55, Joel Fernandes (Google.) wrote:
> From: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>
>
> Currently there is a chance of a schedutil cpufreq update request to be
> dropped if there is a pending update request. This pending request can
> be delayed if there is a scheduling delay of the irq_work and the wake
> up of the schedutil governor kthread.
>
> A very bad scenario is when a schedutil request was already just made,
> such as to reduce the CPU frequency, then a newer request to increase
> CPU frequency (even sched deadline urgent frequency increase requests)
> can be dropped, even though the rate limits suggest that its Ok to
> process a request. This is because of the way the work_in_progress flag
> is used.
>
> This patch improves the situation by allowing new requests to happen
> even though the old one is still being processed. Note that in this
> approach, if an irq_work was already issued, we just update next_freq
> and don't bother to queue another request so there's no extra work being
> done to make this happen.

Maybe I'm missing something but... is not this patch just a partial
mitigation of the issue you descrive above?

If a DL freq increase is queued, with this patch we store the request
but we don't actually increase the frequency until the next schedutil
update, which can be one tick away... isn't it?

If that's the case, maybe something like the following can complete
the cure?

---8<---
#define SUGOV_FREQ_NONE 0

static unsigned int sugov_work_update(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy,
unsigned int prev_freq)
{
unsigned long irq_flags;
bool update_freq = true;
unsigned int next_freq;

/*
* Hold sg_policy->update_lock shortly to handle the case where:
* incase sg_policy->next_freq is read here, and then updated by
* sugov_update_shared 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, irq_flags);
next_freq = sg_policy->next_freq;
sg_policy->work_in_progress = false;
if (prev_freq == next_freq)
update_freq = false;
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sg_policy->update_lock, irq_flags);

/*
* Update the frequency only if it has changed since the last call.
*/
if (update_freq) {
mutex_lock(&sg_policy->work_lock);
__cpufreq_driver_target(sg_policy->policy, next_freq, CPUFREQ_RELATION_L);
mutex_unlock(&sg_policy->work_lock);

return next_freq;
}

return SUGOV_FREQ_NONE;
}

static void sugov_work(struct kthread_work *work)
{
struct sugov_policy *sg_policy = container_of(work, struct sugov_policy, work);
unsigned int prev_freq = 0;

/*
* Keep updating the frequency until we end up with a frequency which
* satisfies the most recent request we got meanwhile.
*/
do {
prev_freq = sugov_work_update(sg_policy, prev_freq);
} while (prev_freq != SUGOV_FREQ_NONE);
}
---8<---

--
#include <best/regards.h>

Patrick Bellasi

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-05-21 12:51    [W:0.188 / U:0.908 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site