Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 25 Aug 2020 11:33:59 +0530 | From | Viresh Kumar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] cpufreq: move invariance setter calls in cpufreq core |
| |
On 24-08-20, 22:02, Ionela Voinescu wrote: > To properly scale its per-entity load-tracking signals, the task scheduler > needs to be given a frequency scale factor, i.e. some image of the current > frequency the CPU is running at. Currently, this scale can be computed > either by using counters (APERF/MPERF on x86, AMU on arm64), or by > piggy-backing on the frequency selection done by cpufreq. > > For the latter, drivers have to explicitly set the scale factor > themselves, despite it being purely boiler-plate code: the required > information depends entirely on the kind of frequency switch callback > implemented by the driver, i.e. either of: target_index(), target(), > fast_switch() and setpolicy(). > > The fitness of those callbacks with regard to driving the Frequency > Invariance Engine (FIE) is studied below: > > target_index() > ============== > Documentation states that the chosen frequency "must be determined by > freq_table[index].frequency". It isn't clear if it *has* to be that > frequency, or if it can use that frequency value to do some computation > that ultimately leads to a different frequency selection. All drivers > go for the former, while the vexpress-spc-cpufreq has an atypical > implementation which is handled separately. > > Therefore, the hook works on the assumption the core can use > freq_table[index].frequency. > > target() > ======= > This has been flagged as deprecated since: > > commit 9c0ebcf78fde ("cpufreq: Implement light weight ->target_index() routine") > > It also doesn't have that many users: > > gx-suspmod.c:439: .target = cpufreq_gx_target, > s3c24xx-cpufreq.c:428: .target = s3c_cpufreq_target, > intel_pstate.c:2528: .target = intel_cpufreq_target, > cppc_cpufreq.c:401: .target = cppc_cpufreq_set_target, > cpufreq-nforce2.c:371: .target = nforce2_target, > sh-cpufreq.c:163: .target = sh_cpufreq_target, > pcc-cpufreq.c:573: .target = pcc_cpufreq_target, > > Similarly to the path taken for target_index() calls in the cpufreq core > during a frequency change, all of the drivers above will mark the end of a > frequency change by a call to cpufreq_freq_transition_end(). > > Therefore, cpufreq_freq_transition_end() can be used as the location for > the arch_set_freq_scale() call to potentially inform the scheduler of the > frequency change. > > This change maintains the previous functionality for the drivers that > implement the target_index() callback, while also adding support for the > few drivers that implement the deprecated target() callback. > > fast_switch() > ============= > This callback *has* to return the frequency that was selected. > > setpolicy() > =========== > This callback does not have any designated way of informing what was the > end choice. But there are only two drivers using setpolicy(), and none > of them have current FIE support: > > drivers/cpufreq/longrun.c:281: .setpolicy = longrun_set_policy, > drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c:2215: .setpolicy = intel_pstate_set_policy, > > The intel_pstate is known to use counter-driven frequency invariance. > > Conclusion > ========== > > Given that the significant majority of current FIE enabled drivers use > callbacks that lend themselves to triggering the setting of the FIE scale > factor in a generic way, move the invariance setter calls to cpufreq core. > > As a result of setting the frequency scale factor in cpufreq core, after > callbacks that lend themselves to trigger it, remove this functionality > from the driver side. > > To be noted that despite marking a successful frequency change, many > cpufreq drivers will consider the new frequency as the requested > frequency, although this is might not be the one granted by the hardware. > > Therefore, the call to arch_set_freq_scale() is a "best effort" one, and > it is up to the architecture if the new frequency is used in the new > frequency scale factor setting (determined by the implementation of > arch_set_freq_scale()) or eventually used by the scheduler (determined > by the implementation of arch_scale_freq_capacity()). The architecture > is in a better position to decide if it has better methods to obtain > more accurate information regarding the current frequency and use that > information instead (for example, the use of counters). > > Also, the implementation to arch_set_freq_scale() will now have to handle > error conditions (current frequency == 0) in order to prevent the > overhead in cpufreq core when the default arch_set_freq_scale() > implementation is used. > > Signed-off-by: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com> > Suggested-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> > Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c | 10 +--------- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 12 +++++++++++- > drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c | 9 +-------- > drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c | 12 ++---------- > drivers/cpufreq/scpi-cpufreq.c | 6 +----- > drivers/cpufreq/vexpress-spc-cpufreq.c | 12 ++---------- > 6 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-- viresh
| |