[PATCH RFC 0/8] SCHED_DEADLINE freq/cpu invariance and OPP selection

4404 [4] C. Scordino, G. Lipari, A Resource Reservation Algorithm for Power-Aware Scheduling of Periodic and Aperiodic Real-Time Tasks, IEEE Transactions on Computers, December 2006. Juri Lelli (8): sched/cpufreq_schedutil: make use of DEADLINE utilization signal sched/deadline: move cpu

[PATCH RFC 0/8] SCHED_DEADLINE freq/cpu invariance and OPP selection

4404 [4] C. Scordino, G. Lipari, A Resource Reservation Algorithm for Power-Aware Scheduling of Periodic and Aperiodic Real-Time Tasks, IEEE Transactions on Computers, December 2006. Juri Lelli (8): sched/cpufreq_schedutil: make use of DEADLINE utilization signal sched/deadline: move cpu

[PATCH RFC 3/8] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: make worker kthread be SCHED_DEADLINE

Worker kthread needs to be able to change frequency for all other threads. Make it special, just under STOP class. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.

[PATCH RFC 3/8] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: make worker kthread be SCHED_DEADLINE

Worker kthread needs to be able to change frequency for all other threads. Make it special, just under STOP class. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki Cc: Viresh Kumar Cc: Luca Abeni Cc: Claudio Scordino --- include/linux/sched.h

[PATCH RFC 7/8] sched/sched.h: move arch_scale_{freq,cpu}_capacity outside CONFIG_SMP

invariance. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> --- include/linux/sched/topology.h | 12 ++-- kernel/sched/sched.h | 13 ++--- 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 9

[PATCH RFC 6/8] sched/sched.h: remove sd arch_scale_freq_capacity parameter

sd parameter is never used in arch_scale_freq_capacity (and it's hard to see where information coming from scheduling domains might help doing frequency invariance scaling). Remove it; also in anticipation of moving arch_scale_freq_capacity outside CONFIG_SMP. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri

[PATCH RFC 7/8] sched/sched.h: move arch_scale_{freq,cpu}_capacity outside CONFIG_SMP

invariance. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ingo Molnar --- include/linux/sched/topology.h | 12 ++-- kernel/sched/sched.h | 13 ++--- 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/sched/topology.h b/include/linux/sched

[PATCH RFC 6/8] sched/sched.h: remove sd arch_scale_freq_capacity parameter

sd parameter is never used in arch_scale_freq_capacity (and it's hard to see where information coming from scheduling domains might help doing frequency invariance scaling). Remove it; also in anticipation of moving arch_scale_freq_capacity outside CONFIG_SMP. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli Cc

[PATCH RFC 8/8] sched/deadline: make bandwidth enforcement scale-invariant

to be specified profiling the task execution at max frequency on biggest capacity core) gets thus scaled accordingly. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@

[PATCH RFC 8/8] sched/deadline: make bandwidth enforcement scale-invariant

to be specified profiling the task execution at max frequency on biggest capacity core) gets thus scaled accordingly. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki Cc: Viresh Kumar Cc: Luca Abeni Cc: Claudio Scordino --- Changes from RFD - either apply

[PATCH RFC 4/8] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: split utilization signals

() parameter list. After this change aggregation of the different signals has to be performed by sugov_get_util() users (so that they can decide what to do with the different signals). Suggested-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com&g

[PATCH RFC 4/8] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: split utilization signals

() parameter list. After this change aggregation of the different signals has to be performed by sugov_get_util() users (so that they can decide what to do with the different signals). Suggested-by: Rafael J. Wysocki Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki

[PATCH RFC 5/8] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: always consider all CPUs when deciding next freq

-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org> Cc: Luca Abeni <luca.ab...@santannapisa.it> Cc: Claud

[PATCH RFC 5/8] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: always consider all CPUs when deciding next freq

-by: Juri Lelli Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki Cc: Viresh Kumar Cc: Luca Abeni Cc: Claudio Scordino --- Changes from RFD - discard CFS contribution only as stale (as suggested by Rafael) --- kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 17 +++-- 1 file changed, 11

[PATCH RFC 2/8] sched/deadline: move cpu frequency selection triggering points

-by: Claudio Scordino <clau...@evidence.eu.com> Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org> Cc: Lu

[PATCH RFC 2/8] sched/deadline: move cpu frequency selection triggering points

-by: Claudio Scordino Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki Cc: Viresh Kumar Cc: Luca Abeni --- kernel/sched/deadline.c | 7 --- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c index

[PATCH RFC 1/8] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: make use of DEADLINE utilization signal

-by: Claudio Scordino <clau...@evidence.eu.com> Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@li

[PATCH RFC 1/8] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: make use of DEADLINE utilization signal

-by: Claudio Scordino Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki Cc: Viresh Kumar Cc: Luca Abeni --- include/linux/sched/cpufreq.h| 2 -- kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 13 ++--- 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff

Re: [RESEND PATCH v3] sched/deadline: Remove unnecessary condition in push_dl_task()

+cc rost...@goodmis.org > +cc juri.le...@arm.com > +cc bris...@redhat.com > > > > > Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.p...@lge.com> > > Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rost...@goodmis.org> > > Reviewed-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> It looked, and still looks, good to me. :) Thanks, - Juri

Re: [RESEND PATCH v3] sched/deadline: Remove unnecessary condition in push_dl_task()

+cc rost...@goodmis.org > +cc juri.le...@arm.com > +cc bris...@redhat.com > > > > > Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park > > Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) > > Reviewed-by: Juri Lelli It looked, and still looks, good to me. :) Thanks, - Juri

Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] sched/deadline: Refer to cpudl.elements atomically

On 16/05/17 15:52, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 10:25:30AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Fri, 12 May 2017 14:48:45 +0900 > > Byungchul Park wrote: > > > > > cpudl.elements is an instance that should be protected with a spin lock. > > > Without it,

Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] sched/deadline: Refer to cpudl.elements atomically

On 16/05/17 15:52, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 10:25:30AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Fri, 12 May 2017 14:48:45 +0900 > > Byungchul Park wrote: > > > > > cpudl.elements is an instance that should be protected with a spin lock. > > > Without it, the code would be

Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] sched/deadline: Refer to cpudl.elements atomically

Hi, On 12/05/17 10:25, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 12 May 2017 14:48:45 +0900 > Byungchul Park wrote: > > > cpudl.elements is an instance that should be protected with a spin lock. > > Without it, the code would be insane. > > And how much contention will this add?

Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] sched/deadline: Refer to cpudl.elements atomically

Hi, On 12/05/17 10:25, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 12 May 2017 14:48:45 +0900 > Byungchul Park wrote: > > > cpudl.elements is an instance that should be protected with a spin lock. > > Without it, the code would be insane. > > And how much contention will this add? Spin locks in the

Re: [RFC][PATCH] sched/deadline: Remove if statement before clearing throttle and yielded

Hi, On 10/05/17 09:50, Steven Rostedt wrote: > [ > This is an RFC as I didn't run any benchmarks. It just seemed a bit > weird to me that we would add such a check instead of just clearing > these variables out regardless. > ] > > The function replenish_dl_entity() clears dl_throttled and

Re: [RFC][PATCH] sched/deadline: Remove if statement before clearing throttle and yielded

Hi, On 10/05/17 09:50, Steven Rostedt wrote: > [ > This is an RFC as I didn't run any benchmarks. It just seemed a bit > weird to me that we would add such a check instead of just clearing > these variables out regardless. > ] > > The function replenish_dl_entity() clears dl_throttled and

Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: Zero out positive runtime after throttling constrained tasks

Hi, On 10/05/17 21:03, Xunlei Pang wrote: > When a contrained task is throttled by dl_check_constrained_dl(), > it may carry the remaining positive runtime, as a result when > dl_task_timer() fires and calls replenish_dl_entity(), it will > not be replenished correctly due to the positive

Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: Zero out positive runtime after throttling constrained tasks

Hi, On 10/05/17 21:03, Xunlei Pang wrote: > When a contrained task is throttled by dl_check_constrained_dl(), > it may carry the remaining positive runtime, as a result when > dl_task_timer() fires and calls replenish_dl_entity(), it will > not be replenished correctly due to the positive

Re: [PATCH v4 0/8] Fix issues and factorize arm/arm64 capacity information code

On 11/05/17 10:59, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 09:48:30AM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote: > > Hi Greg, > > > > I'm not sure what your plans are with this set. Are we targeting 4.12? > > > > IMHO, if possible, it would be good to have this refactoring in now

Re: [PATCH v4 0/8] Fix issues and factorize arm/arm64 capacity information code

On 11/05/17 10:59, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 09:48:30AM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote: > > Hi Greg, > > > > I'm not sure what your plans are with this set. Are we targeting 4.12? > > > > IMHO, if possible, it would be good to have this refactoring in now

Re: [PATCH v4 0/8] Fix issues and factorize arm/arm64 capacity information code

Hi Greg, I'm not sure what your plans are with this set. Are we targeting 4.12? IMHO, if possible, it would be good to have this refactoring in now, so that we can base further development on it for the next cycle. Thanks, - Juri On 20/04/17 15:43, Juri Lelli wrote: > Hi, > > arm

Re: [PATCH v4 0/8] Fix issues and factorize arm/arm64 capacity information code

Hi Greg, I'm not sure what your plans are with this set. Are we targeting 4.12? IMHO, if possible, it would be good to have this refactoring in now, so that we can base further development on it for the next cycle. Thanks, - Juri On 20/04/17 15:43, Juri Lelli wrote: > Hi, > > arm

Re: [PATCH] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: use now as reference when aggregating shared policy requests

Hi Rafael, On 04/05/17 16:29, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday, May 03, 2017 02:30:48 PM Juri Lelli wrote: > > Currently, sugov_next_freq_shared() uses last_freq_update_time as a > > reference to decide when to start considering CPU contributions as > > stale. &g

Re: [PATCH] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: use now as reference when aggregating shared policy requests

Hi Rafael, On 04/05/17 16:29, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday, May 03, 2017 02:30:48 PM Juri Lelli wrote: > > Currently, sugov_next_freq_shared() uses last_freq_update_time as a > > reference to decide when to start considering CPU contributions as > > stale. &g

[PATCH] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: use now as reference when aggregating shared policy requests

working around stale CPU states. Fix the problem by always considering now (time) as the reference for deciding when CPUs have stale contributions. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh

[PATCH] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: use now as reference when aggregating shared policy requests

working around stale CPU states. Fix the problem by always considering now (time) as the reference for deciding when CPUs have stale contributions. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki Cc: Viresh Kumar --- kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 7 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+),

Re: about CPU QoS in KVM

Hi, just noticed this and thought I might just jump in. :) On 20/04/17 16:00, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Adding Rik. > > Paolo > > On 20/04/2017 15:32, Gonglei (Arei) wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Currently, KVM do the CPU resource reservation by the cgroup mechanism > > which can't do entire

Re: about CPU QoS in KVM

Hi, just noticed this and thought I might just jump in. :) On 20/04/17 16:00, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Adding Rik. > > Paolo > > On 20/04/2017 15:32, Gonglei (Arei) wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Currently, KVM do the CPU resource reservation by the cgroup mechanism > > which can't do entire

Re: bfq-mq performance comparison to cfq

Hi, sorry if I jump into this interesting conversation, but I felt some people might have missed this and might be interested as well (even if from a slightly different POW). Let me Cc them (Patrick, Morten, Peter, Joel, Andres). On 19/04/17 09:02, Paolo Valente wrote: > > > Il giorno 19 apr

Re: bfq-mq performance comparison to cfq

Hi, sorry if I jump into this interesting conversation, but I felt some people might have missed this and might be interested as well (even if from a slightly different POW). Let me Cc them (Patrick, Morten, Peter, Joel, Andres). On 19/04/17 09:02, Paolo Valente wrote: > > > Il giorno 19 apr

Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: fix switching to -deadline

On 24/04/17 12:36, Luca Abeni wrote: > On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 11:16:24 +0100 > Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> wrote: > > > On 21/04/17 21:08, Luca Abeni wrote: [...] > > > > > > Well, double thinking about it, this is an interesting problem... > > >

Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: fix switching to -deadline

On 24/04/17 12:36, Luca Abeni wrote: > On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 11:16:24 +0100 > Juri Lelli wrote: > > > On 21/04/17 21:08, Luca Abeni wrote: [...] > > > > > > Well, double thinking about it, this is an interesting problem... > > > What do we want to do

Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: fix switching to -deadline

On 21/04/17 21:08, Luca Abeni wrote: > On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 11:26:59 +0100 > Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> wrote: > > On 21/04/17 11:59, Luca Abeni wrote: > > > On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 10:47:29 +0100 > > > Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> wrote: > >

Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: fix switching to -deadline

On 21/04/17 21:08, Luca Abeni wrote: > On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 11:26:59 +0100 > Juri Lelli wrote: > > On 21/04/17 11:59, Luca Abeni wrote: > > > On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 10:47:29 +0100 > > > Juri Lelli wrote: > > > [...] > > > > > > >

Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: fix switching to -deadline

On 21/04/17 11:59, Luca Abeni wrote: > On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 10:47:29 +0100 > Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> wrote: > [...] > > > > > *dl_se, update_dl_entity(dl_se, pi_se); > > > > > else if (flags & ENQUEUE_REPLENISH) > &g

Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: fix switching to -deadline

On 21/04/17 11:59, Luca Abeni wrote: > On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 10:47:29 +0100 > Juri Lelli wrote: > [...] > > > > > *dl_se, update_dl_entity(dl_se, pi_se); > > > > > else if (flags & ENQUEUE_REPLENISH) > > > > > replenis

Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: fix switching to -deadline

On 21/04/17 11:42, Luca Abeni wrote: > On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 10:39:26 +0100 > Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> wrote: > > > Hi Luca, > > > > On 20/04/17 21:30, Luca Abeni wrote: > > > From: Luca Abeni <luca.ab...@santannapisa.it> > > > >

Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: fix switching to -deadline

On 21/04/17 11:42, Luca Abeni wrote: > On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 10:39:26 +0100 > Juri Lelli wrote: > > > Hi Luca, > > > > On 20/04/17 21:30, Luca Abeni wrote: > > > From: Luca Abeni > > > > > > When switching to -deadline, if

Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: fix switching to -deadline

Hi Luca, On 20/04/17 21:30, Luca Abeni wrote: > From: Luca Abeni > > When switching to -deadline, if the scheduling deadline of a task is > in the past then switched_to_dl() calls setup_new_entity() to properly > initialize the scheduling deadline and runtime. > >

Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: fix switching to -deadline

Hi Luca, On 20/04/17 21:30, Luca Abeni wrote: > From: Luca Abeni > > When switching to -deadline, if the scheduling deadline of a task is > in the past then switched_to_dl() calls setup_new_entity() to properly > initialize the scheduling deadline and runtime. > > The problem is that the task

[PATCH v4 2/8] Documentation/ABI: add information about cpu_capacity

/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu#/cpu_capacity describe information about CPUs heterogeneity (ref. to Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/ cpu-capacity.txt). Add such description. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> Acked-by: Russell King <rmk+ker...@armlinux.org.uk> --- D

[PATCH v4 2/8] Documentation/ABI: add information about cpu_capacity

/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu#/cpu_capacity describe information about CPUs heterogeneity (ref. to Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/ cpu-capacity.txt). Add such description. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli Acked-by: Russell King --- Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu | 7

[PATCH v4 0/8] Fix issues and factorize arm/arm64 capacity information code

/default_caps_factorize-v4 Best, - Juri [1] v1 - https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel=148483680119355=2 v2 - https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel=148663344018205=2 v3 - http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel=149062080701399=2 Juri Lelli (8): Documentation: arm: fix wrong reference number in DT definition

[PATCH v4 0/8] Fix issues and factorize arm/arm64 capacity information code

/default_caps_factorize-v4 Best, - Juri [1] v1 - https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel=148483680119355=2 v2 - https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel=148663344018205=2 v3 - http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel=149062080701399=2 Juri Lelli (8): Documentation: arm: fix wrong reference number in DT definition

[PATCH v4 4/8] arm: remove wrong CONFIG_PROC_SYSCTL ifdef

ty attribute') Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> Acked-by: Russell King <rmk+ker...@armlinux.org.uk> --- arch/arm/kernel/topology.c | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c index 1b8ec3054642..40dd35aa46

[PATCH v4 4/8] arm: remove wrong CONFIG_PROC_SYSCTL ifdef

The sysfs cpu_capacity entry for each CPU has nothing to do with PROC_FS, nor it's in /proc/sys path. Remove such ifdef. Cc: Russell King Reported-and-suggested-by: Sudeep Holla Fixes: 7e5930aaef5d ('ARM: 8622/3: add sysfs cpu_capacity attribute') Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli Acked-by: Russell

[PATCH v4 7/8] arm,arm64,drivers: move externs in a new header file

Create a new header file (include/linux/arch_topology.h) and put there declarations of interfaces used by arm, arm64 and drivers code. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> Acked-by: Russell King <rmk+ker...@armlinux.org.uk> Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.mari...@arm

[PATCH v4 7/8] arm,arm64,drivers: move externs in a new header file

Create a new header file (include/linux/arch_topology.h) and put there declarations of interfaces used by arm, arm64 and drivers code. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli Acked-by: Russell King Acked-by: Catalin Marinas --- arch/arm/kernel/topology.c| 7 +-- arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 4

[PATCH v4 6/8] arm,arm64,drivers: reduce scope of cap_parsing_failed

) means cap_from _dt is set to false. For arm64 we can simply check if raw_capacity points to something, which is not if capacity parsing has failed. Suggested-by: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmus...@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> Acked-by: Russell K

[PATCH v4 6/8] arm,arm64,drivers: reduce scope of cap_parsing_failed

) means cap_from _dt is set to false. For arm64 we can simply check if raw_capacity points to something, which is not if capacity parsing has failed. Suggested-by: Morten Rasmussen Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli Acked-by: Russell King Acked-by: Catalin Marinas --- arch/arm/kernel/topology.c | 3

[PATCH v4 8/8] arm,arm64,drivers: add a prefix to drivers arch_topology interfaces

interfaces. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> Acked-by: Russell King <rmk+ker...@armlinux.org.uk> Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.mari...@arm.com> --- arch/arm/kernel/topology.c| 8 arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 4 ++-- drivers/base/arc

[PATCH v4 8/8] arm,arm64,drivers: add a prefix to drivers arch_topology interfaces

interfaces. Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli Acked-by: Russell King Acked-by: Catalin Marinas --- arch/arm/kernel/topology.c| 8 arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 4 ++-- drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 20 ++-- include/linux/arch_topology.h | 8 4 files changed

[PATCH v4 5/8] arm, arm64: factorize common cpu capacity default code

<will.dea...@arm.com> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> Acked-by: Russell King <rmk+ker...@armlinux.org.uk> Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.mari...@arm.com> --- Changes from v2: - make capacity_scale and

[PATCH v4 5/8] arm, arm64: factorize common cpu capacity default code

additions. Suggested-by: Will Deacon Suggested-by: Mark Rutland Suggested-by: Catalin Marinas Cc: Russell King Cc: Catalin Marinas Cc: Will Deacon Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli Acked-by: Russell King Acked-by: Catalin Marinas --- Changes from v2: - make capacity_scale

[PATCH v4 3/8] arm: fix return value of parse_cpu_capacity

3: parse cpu capacity-dmips-mhz from DT') Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> Acked-by: Russell King <rmk+ker...@armlinux.org.uk> --- Changes from v3: - directly return 0 on failure (as pointed out by Vincent) --- arch/arm/kernel/topology.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion

[PATCH v4 3/8] arm: fix return value of parse_cpu_capacity

parse_cpu_capacity() has to return 0 on failure, but it currently returns 1 instead if raw_capacity kcalloc failed. Fix it (by directly returning 0). Cc: Russell King Reported-by: Morten Rasmussen Fixes: 06073ee26775 ('ARM: 8621/3: parse cpu capacity-dmips-mhz from DT') Signed-off-by: Juri

[PATCH v4 1/8] Documentation: arm: fix wrong reference number in DT definition

Reference to cpu capacity binding has a wrong number. Fix it. Reported-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieral...@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> Acked-by: Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org> Acked-by: Russell King <rmk+ker...@armlinux.org.uk> ---

[PATCH v4 1/8] Documentation: arm: fix wrong reference number in DT definition

Reference to cpu capacity binding has a wrong number. Fix it. Reported-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli Acked-by: Rob Herring Acked-by: Russell King --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git

Re: On the unlikely off-chance that this is new news

Hi Paul, On 12/04/17 08:15, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > Hello! > > On the unlikely off-chance that this is new news... > It is actually new news for me (it might be still unlikely for Peter, Luca and Tommaso, that I Cc-ed). > A Hannes Weisbach of TU Dresden published this masters thesis on >

Re: On the unlikely off-chance that this is new news

Hi Paul, On 12/04/17 08:15, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > Hello! > > On the unlikely off-chance that this is new news... > It is actually new news for me (it might be still unlikely for Peter, Luca and Tommaso, that I Cc-ed). > A Hannes Weisbach of TU Dresden published this masters thesis on >

Re: [RFC/RFT][PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: Reduce frequencies slower

Hi Rafael, On 11/04/17 23:23, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki > wrote: > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > > > The schedutil governor reduces frequencies too fast in some > > situations which cases

Re: [RFC/RFT][PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: Reduce frequencies slower

Hi Rafael, On 11/04/17 23:23, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki > wrote: > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > > > The schedutil governor reduces frequencies too fast in some > > situations which cases undesirable performance drops to > > appear. > > > >

Re: [PATCH v3 6/9] drivers: remove useless comment from base/arch_topology.c

On 10/04/17 17:33, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 03:02:14PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 10/04/17 14:51, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 02:18:22PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote: > > >

Re: [PATCH v3 6/9] drivers: remove useless comment from base/arch_topology.c

On 10/04/17 17:33, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 03:02:14PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 10/04/17 14:51, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 02:18:22PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote: > > >

Re: [RFC/RFT][PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: schedutil: Utilization aggregation

On 10/04/17 23:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> wrote: [...] > > Given that for RT (and still for DL as well) the next event is a > > periodic tick, couldn't happen that the required frequency transiti

Re: [RFC/RFT][PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: schedutil: Utilization aggregation

On 10/04/17 23:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Juri Lelli wrote: [...] > > Given that for RT (and still for DL as well) the next event is a > > periodic tick, couldn't happen that the required frequency transition > > for an RT task, that

Re: [PATCH v3 5/9] arm, arm64: factorize common cpu capacity default code

Hi, On 10/04/17 09:18, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 02:18:21PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote: > > arm and arm64 share lot of code relative to parsing CPU capacity > > information from DT, using that information for appropriate scaling and > > exposing a sysfs

Re: [PATCH v3 5/9] arm, arm64: factorize common cpu capacity default code

Hi, On 10/04/17 09:18, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 02:18:21PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote: > > arm and arm64 share lot of code relative to parsing CPU capacity > > information from DT, using that information for appropriate scaling and > > exposing a sysfs

Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Fix issues and factorize arm/arm64 capacity information code

Hi, On 10/04/17 16:05, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 02:18:16PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote: > > arm and arm64 topology.c share a lot of code related to parsing of capacity > > information. This is v3 of a solution [1] (based on Will's, Catalin's and >

Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Fix issues and factorize arm/arm64 capacity information code

Hi, On 10/04/17 16:05, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 02:18:16PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote: > > arm and arm64 topology.c share a lot of code related to parsing of capacity > > information. This is v3 of a solution [1] (based on Will's, Catalin's and >

Re: [PATCH v3 6/9] drivers: remove useless comment from base/arch_topology.c

Hi, On 10/04/17 14:51, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 02:18:22PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote: > > Printing out an error message when we failed to get the cpu device is > > not helping anyone. Remove it. > > (1) the subject line talks about removing a

Re: [PATCH v3 6/9] drivers: remove useless comment from base/arch_topology.c

Hi, On 10/04/17 14:51, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 02:18:22PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote: > > Printing out an error message when we failed to get the cpu device is > > not helping anyone. Remove it. > > (1) the subject line talks about removing a

Re: [RFC/RFT][PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: schedutil: Utilization aggregation

Hi Rafael, thanks for this set. I'll give it a try (together with your previous patch) in the next few days. A question below. On 10/04/17 02:11, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > Due to the limitation of the rate of frequency changes the

Re: [RFC/RFT][PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: schedutil: Utilization aggregation

Hi Rafael, thanks for this set. I'll give it a try (together with your previous patch) in the next few days. A question below. On 10/04/17 02:11, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > Due to the limitation of the rate of frequency changes the schedutil > governor only

Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Fix issues and factorize arm/arm64 capacity information code

Hi, On 27/03/17 14:18, Juri Lelli wrote: > Hi, > > arm and arm64 topology.c share a lot of code related to parsing of capacity > information. This is v3 of a solution [1] (based on Will's, Catalin's and > Mark's off-line suggestions) to move such common code in a single place:

Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Fix issues and factorize arm/arm64 capacity information code

Hi, On 27/03/17 14:18, Juri Lelli wrote: > Hi, > > arm and arm64 topology.c share a lot of code related to parsing of capacity > information. This is v3 of a solution [1] (based on Will's, Catalin's and > Mark's off-line suggestions) to move such common code in a single place:

Re: [RFC/RFT][PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: Reduce frequencies slower

Hi Rafael, On 30/03/17 23:36, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > The schedutil governor reduces frequencies too fast in some > situations which cases undesirable performance drops to > appear. > > To address that issue, make schedutil reduce the

Re: [RFC/RFT][PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: Reduce frequencies slower

Hi Rafael, On 30/03/17 23:36, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > The schedutil governor reduces frequencies too fast in some > situations which cases undesirable performance drops to > appear. > > To address that issue, make schedutil reduce the frequency slower by >

Re: [RFD PATCH 4/5] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: always consider all CPUs when deciding next freq

On 31/03/17 11:03, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> wrote: > > On 30/03/17 22:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> wrote: > >> > Hi, &

Re: [RFD PATCH 4/5] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: always consider all CPUs when deciding next freq

On 31/03/17 11:03, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Juri Lelli wrote: > > On 30/03/17 22:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Juri Lelli wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > >> Hi, > &

Re: [RFD PATCH 4/5] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: always consider all CPUs when deciding next freq

On 30/03/17 22:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > Hi, > > > On 30/03/17 00:41, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> On Friday, March 24, 2017 02:08:59 PM Juri Lelli wrote: > &g

Re: [RFD PATCH 4/5] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: always consider all CPUs when deciding next freq

On 30/03/17 22:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Juri Lelli wrote: > > Hi, > > Hi, > > > On 30/03/17 00:41, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> On Friday, March 24, 2017 02:08:59 PM Juri Lelli wrote: > >> > No assumption

Re: [RFD PATCH 3/5] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: make worker kthread be SCHED_DEADLINE

On 30/03/17 22:22, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, March 30, 2017 08:50:11 AM Vikram Mulukutla wrote: > > > > > OK > > > > > > So there are two pieces here. > > > > > > One is that if we want *all* drivers to work with schedutil, we need to > > > keep > > > the kthread for the ones

Re: [RFD PATCH 3/5] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: make worker kthread be SCHED_DEADLINE

On 30/03/17 22:22, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, March 30, 2017 08:50:11 AM Vikram Mulukutla wrote: > > > > > OK > > > > > > So there are two pieces here. > > > > > > One is that if we want *all* drivers to work with schedutil, we need to > > > keep > > > the kthread for the ones

Re: [RFD PATCH 4/5] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: always consider all CPUs when deciding next freq

Hi, On 30/03/17 00:41, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, March 24, 2017 02:08:59 PM Juri Lelli wrote: > > No assumption can be made upon the rate at which frequency updates get > > triggered, as there are scheduling policies (like SCHED_DEADLINE) which > > don't trigg

Re: [RFD PATCH 4/5] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: always consider all CPUs when deciding next freq

Hi, On 30/03/17 00:41, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, March 24, 2017 02:08:59 PM Juri Lelli wrote: > > No assumption can be made upon the rate at which frequency updates get > > triggered, as there are scheduling policies (like SCHED_DEADLINE) which > > don't trigg

Re: [PATCH v3 3/9] arm: fix return value of parse_cpu_capacity

On 29/03/17 09:37, Vincent Guittot wrote: > On 27 March 2017 at 15:18, Juri Lelli <juri.le...@arm.com> wrote: > > parse_cpu_capacity() has to return 0 on failure, but it currently returns > > 1 instead if raw_capacity kcalloc failed. > > > > Fix it by removing

Re: [PATCH v3 3/9] arm: fix return value of parse_cpu_capacity

On 29/03/17 09:37, Vincent Guittot wrote: > On 27 March 2017 at 15:18, Juri Lelli wrote: > > parse_cpu_capacity() has to return 0 on failure, but it currently returns > > 1 instead if raw_capacity kcalloc failed. > > > > Fix it by removing the negation of the return

Re: [PATCH 0/8] sched/deadline: Return the best satisfying affinity and dl in cpudl_find

On 28/03/17 09:42, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 03:05:07PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 23/03/17 19:32, Byungchul Park wrote: > > > cpudl_find() is used to find a cpu having the latest dl. The function > > > should retu

Re: [PATCH 0/8] sched/deadline: Return the best satisfying affinity and dl in cpudl_find

On 28/03/17 09:42, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 03:05:07PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 23/03/17 19:32, Byungchul Park wrote: > > > cpudl_find() is used to find a cpu having the latest dl. The function > > > should retu

<    5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   >