Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | Claudio Scordino <> | Subject | [PATCH v4] cpufreq: schedutil: rate limits for SCHED_DEADLINE | Date | Tue, 13 Mar 2018 11:35:40 +0100 |
| |
When the SCHED_DEADLINE scheduling class increases the CPU utilization, we should not wait for the rate limit, otherwise we may miss some deadline.
Tests using rt-app on Exynos5422 with up to 10 SCHED_DEADLINE tasks have shown reductions of even 10% of deadline misses with a negligible increase of energy consumption (measured through Baylibre Cape).
Signed-off-by: Claudio Scordino <claudio@evidence.eu.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> CC: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> CC: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> CC: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com> CC: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> CC: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com> CC: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com> CC: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> CC: Todd Kjos <tkjos@android.com> CC: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> CC: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --- Changes from v3: - Specific routine renamed as ignore_dl_rate_limit() --- Changes from v2: - Rate limit ignored also in case of "fast switch" - Specific routine added --- Changes from v1: - Logic moved from sugov_should_update_freq() to sugov_update_single()/_shared() to not duplicate data structures - Rate limit not ignored in case of "fast switch" --- kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c index feb5f89..2aeb1ca 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c @@ -257,6 +257,16 @@ static bool sugov_cpu_is_busy(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu) static inline bool sugov_cpu_is_busy(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu) { return false; } #endif /* CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON */ +/* + * Make sugov_should_update_freq() ignore the rate limit when DL + * has increased the utilization. + */ +static inline void ignore_dl_rate_limit(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu, struct sugov_policy *sg_policy) +{ + if (cpu_util_dl(cpu_rq(sg_cpu->cpu)) > sg_cpu->util_dl) + sg_policy->need_freq_update = true; +} + static void sugov_update_single(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time, unsigned int flags) { @@ -270,6 +280,8 @@ static void sugov_update_single(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time, sugov_set_iowait_boost(sg_cpu, time); sg_cpu->last_update = time; + ignore_dl_rate_limit(sg_cpu, sg_policy); + if (!sugov_should_update_freq(sg_policy, time)) return; @@ -351,6 +363,8 @@ sugov_update_shared(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time, unsigned int flags) raw_spin_lock(&sg_policy->update_lock); + ignore_dl_rate_limit(sg_cpu, sg_policy); + sugov_get_util(sg_cpu); sg_cpu->flags = flags; -- 2.7.4
| |