lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jun]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 1/7] PM: Introduce em_pd_get_higher_freq()
From
Date
Hi Patrick,

On 5/16/19 2:22 PM, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> On 16-May 14:01, Quentin Perret wrote:
>> On Thursday 16 May 2019 at 13:42:00 (+0100), Patrick Bellasi wrote:
>>>> +static inline unsigned long em_pd_get_higher_freq(struct em_perf_domain *pd,
>>>> + unsigned long min_freq, unsigned long cost_margin)
>>>> +{
>>>> + unsigned long max_cost = 0;
>>>> + struct em_cap_state *cs;
>>>> + int i;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (!pd)
>>>> + return min_freq;
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Compute the maximum allowed cost */
>>>> + for (i = 0; i < pd->nr_cap_states; i++) {
>>>> + cs = &pd->table[i];
>>>> + if (cs->frequency >= min_freq) {
>>>> + max_cost = cs->cost + (cs->cost * cost_margin) / 1024;
>>> ^^^^
>>> ... end here we should probably better use SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE
>>> instead of hard-coding in values, isn't it?
>>
>> I'm not sure to agree. This isn't part of the scheduler per se, and the
>> cost thing isn't in units of capacity, but in units of power, so I don't
>> think SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE is correct here.
>
> Right, I get the units do not match and it would not be elegant to use
> it here...
>
>> But I agree these hard coded values (that one, and the 512 in one of the
>> following patches) could use some motivation :-)
>
> ... ultimately SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE is just SCHED_FIXEDPOINT_SCALE,
> which is adimensional. Perhaps we should use that or yet another alias
> for the same.

Would it be a good idea to use SCHED_FIXEDPOINT_SCALE in energy.c ?
Since it's not part of the scheduler, maybe there is a scale covering a wider scope,
or we can introduce a similar ENERGY_FIXEDPOINT_SCALE in energy_model.h.


>> Thanks,
>> Quentin
>

Thanks,
Douglas

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-06-19 18:09    [W:0.052 / U:1.364 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site