On 18-05-17, 23:23, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> We should apply the iowait boost only if cpufreq policy has iowait boost
> enabled. Also make it a schedutil configuration from sysfs so it can be turned
> on/off if needed (by default initialize it to the policy value).
>
> For systems that don't need/want it enabled, such as those on arm64 based
> mobile devices that are battery operated, it saves energy when the cpufreq
> driver policy doesn't have it enabled (details below):
>
> Here are some results for energy measurements collected running a YouTube
> video
> for 30 seconds:
> Before: 8.042533 mWh
> After: 7.948377 mWh
> Energy savings is ~1.2%
>
> Cc: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruv...@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Len Brown <l...@kernel.org>
> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <r...@rjwysocki.net>
> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mi...@redhat.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joe...@google.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> index 76877a62b5fa..0e392b58b9b3 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
> struct sugov_tunables {
> struct gov_attr_set attr_set;
> unsigned int rate_limit_us;
> + bool iowait_boost_enable;
I suggested s/iowait_boost_enable/iowait_boost/ and you said okay for
that change.
> };
>
> struct sugov_policy {
> @@ -171,6 +172,11 @@ static void sugov_get_util(unsigned long *util, unsigned
> long *max)
> static void sugov_set_iowait_boost(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu, u64 time,
> unsigned int flags)
> {
> + struct sugov_policy *sg_policy = sg_cpu->sg_policy;
> +
> + if (!sg_policy->tunables->iowait_boost_enable)
> + return;
> +
> if (flags & SCHED_CPUFREQ_IOWAIT) {
> sg_cpu->iowait_boost = sg_cpu->iowait_boost_max;
> } else if (sg_cpu->iowait_boost) {
> @@ -386,10 +392,34 @@ static ssize_t rate_limit_us_store(struct gov_attr_set
> *attr_set, const char *bu
> return count;
> }
>
> +static ssize_t iowait_boost_enable_show(struct gov_attr_set *attr_set,
> + char *buf)
> +{
> + struct sugov_tunables *tunables = to_sugov_tunables(attr_set);
> +
> + return sprintf(buf, "%u\n", tunables->iowait_boost_enable);
> +}
> +
> +static ssize_t iowait_boost_enable_store(struct gov_attr_set *attr_set,
> + const char *buf, size_t count)
> +{
> + struct sugov_tunables *tunables = to_sugov_tunables(attr_set);
> + bool enable;
> +
> + if (kstrtobool(buf, &enable))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + tunables->iowait_boost_enable = enable;
> +
> + return count;
> +}
> +
> static struct governor_attr rate_limit_us = __ATTR_RW(rate_limit_us);
> +static struct governor_attr iowait_boost_enable =
> __ATTR_RW(iowait_boost_enable);
>
> static struct attribute *sugov_attributes[] = {
> &rate_limit_us.attr,
> + &iowait_boost_enable.attr,
> NULL
> };
Do we really need this right now? I mean, are you going to use it this
way? It may never get used eventually and may be better to leave the
sysfs option for now.
> @@ -543,6 +573,8 @@ static int sugov_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> tunables->rate_limit_us *= lat;
> }
>
> + tunables->iowait_boost_enable = policy->iowait_boost_enable;
> +
> policy->governor_data = sg_policy;
> sg_policy->tunables = tunables;
--
viresh
