lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Sep]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 2/7] sched/pelt: Add a new function to approximate runtime to reach given util
From
On 28/08/2023 00:31, Qais Yousef wrote:
> It is basically the ramp-up time from 0 to a given value. Will be used
> later to implement new tunable to control response time for schedutil.
>
> Signed-off-by: Qais Yousef (Google) <qyousef@layalina.io>
> ---
> kernel/sched/pelt.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
> kernel/sched/sched.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/pelt.c b/kernel/sched/pelt.c
> index 50322005a0ae..f673b9ab92dc 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/pelt.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/pelt.c
> @@ -487,3 +487,24 @@ unsigned long approximate_util_avg(unsigned long util, u64 delta)
>
> return sa.util_avg;
> }
> +
> +/*
> + * Approximate the required amount of runtime in ms required to reach @util.
> + */
> +u64 approximate_runtime(unsigned long util)
> +{
> + struct sched_avg sa = {};
> + u64 delta = 1024; // period = 1024 = ~1ms
> + u64 runtime = 0;
> +
> + if (unlikely(!util))
> + return runtime;
> +
> + while (sa.util_avg < util) {
> + accumulate_sum(delta, &sa, 0, 0, 1);

This looks a bit uncomfortable as the existing comment says that we assume:

if (!load)
runnable = running = 0;

I haven't looked at the math in detail, but if this is okay, maybe a
comment saying why this is okay despite the existing comment says otherwise?

> + ___update_load_avg(&sa, 0);
> + runtime++;
> + }
> +
> + return runtime;
> +} > [...]

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-09-15 11:16    [W:0.372 / U:1.800 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site