[lkml]   [2020]   [Feb]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/3] pseries: Track and expose idle PURR and SPURR ticks
On 12/6/19 2:44 PM, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
> Naveen N. Rao wrote:
>> Hi Nathan,
>> Nathan Lynch wrote:
>>> Hi Kamalesh,
>>> Kamalesh Babulal <> writes:
>>>> On 12/5/19 3:54 AM, Nathan Lynch wrote:
>>>>> "Gautham R. Shenoy" <> writes:
>>>>>> Tools such as lparstat which are used to compute the utilization need
>>>>>> to know [S]PURR ticks when the cpu was busy or idle. The [S]PURR
>>>>>> counters are already exposed through sysfs.  We already account for
>>>>>> PURR ticks when we go to idle so that we can update the VPA area. This
>>>>>> patchset extends support to account for SPURR ticks when idle, and
>>>>>> expose both via per-cpu sysfs files.
>>>>> Does anything really want to use PURR instead of SPURR? Seems like we
>>>>> should expose only SPURR idle values if possible.
>>>> lparstat is one of the consumers of PURR idle metric
>>>> (!topic/powerpc-utils-devel/fYRo69xO9r4). Agree, on the argument that system utilization metrics based on SPURR
>>>> accounting is accurate in comparison to PURR, which isn't proportional to
>>>> CPU frequency.  PURR has been traditionally used to understand the system
>>>> utilization, whereas SPURR is used for understanding how much capacity is
>>>> left/exceeding in the system based on the current power saving mode.
>>> I'll phrase my question differently: does SPURR complement or supercede
>>> PURR? You seem to be saying they serve different purposes. If PURR is
>>> actually useful rather then vestigial then I have no objection to
>>> exposing idle_purr.
>> SPURR complements PURR, so we need both. SPURR/PURR ratio helps provide an indication of the available headroom in terms of core resources, at maximum frequency.
> Re-reading this today morning, I realize that this isn't entirely accurate. SPURR alone is sufficient to understand core resource utilization.
> Kamalesh is using PURR to display non-normalized utilization values (under 'actual' column), as reported by lparstat on AIX. I am not entirely sure if it is ok to derive these based on the SPURR busy/idle ratio.

Both idle_purr and idle_spurr complement each other and we need to expose both of them.
It will improve the accounting accuracy of tools currently consuming system-wide PURR
and/or SPURR numbers to report system usage. Deriving one from another, from my
experience makes it hard for tools or any custom scripts to give an accurate system view.
One tool I am aware of is lparstat, which uses PURR based metrics.


 \ /
  Last update: 2020-02-04 10:14    [W:0.057 / U:0.312 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site