lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jun]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/6] arm, arm64: frequency- and cpu-invariant accounting support for task scheduler
    Hi Dietmar,

    On 08/06/17 08:55, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
    > For a more accurate (i.e. frequency- and cpu-invariant) load-tracking
    > the task scheduler needs a frequency-scaling and on a heterogeneous
    > system a cpu-scaling correction factor.
    >
    > This patch-set implements a Frequency Invariance Engine (FIE)
    > (topology_get_freq_scale()) in drivers/base/arch_topology.c to provide
    > a frequency-scaling correction factor.
    >
    > The Cpu Invariance Engine (CIE) (topology_get_cpu_scale()) providing a
    > cpu-scaling correction factor was already introduced by the "Fix issues
    > and factorize arm/arm64 capacity information code" patch-set [1].
    >
    > This patch-set also enables the frequency- and cpu-invariant accounting
    > support. Enabling here means to associate (wire) the task scheduler
    > cname arch_scale_freq_capacity and arch_scale_cpu_capacity with the FIE
    > and CIE function names from drivers/base/arch_topology.c. This replaces
    > the task scheduler's default FIE and CIE in kernel/sched/sched.h.
    >
    > Patch high level description:
    >
    > [ 01/06] Rework cpufreq policy notifier for frequency-invariant
    > accounting support
    > [ 02/06] Frequency Invariance Engine (FIE)
    > [03,04/06] Enable frequency- and cpu-invariant accounting support on
    > arm
    > [05,06/06] Enable frequency- and cpu-invariant accounting support on
    > arm64
    >
    > The patch-set is based on top of linux-next/master (tag: next-20170607)
    > and it is also available from:
    >
    > git://linux-arm.org/linux-de.git upstream/freq_and_cpu_inv
    >
    > It has been tested on TC2 (arm) and JUNO (arm64) by running a ramp-up
    > rt-app task pinned to a cpu with the ondemand cpufreq governor and
    > checking the load-tracking signals of this task.
    >

    The whole set looks OK to me, and I tested it as well.

    Feel free to add my

    Reviewed-and-tested-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>

    to it.

    Best,

    - Juri

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2017-06-12 15:01    [W:4.434 / U:0.000 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site