Messages in this thread | | | From | Wanpeng Li <> | Date | Thu, 29 Dec 2016 11:24:56 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: add up/down frequency transition rate limits |
| |
2016-11-21 20:26 GMT+08:00 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>: > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:14:32PM +0000, Juri Lelli wrote: >> On 21/11/16 11:19, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >> > So no tunables and rate limits here at all please. >> > >> > During LPC we discussed the rampup and decay issues and decided that we >> > should very much first address them by playing with the PELT stuff. >> > Morton was going to play with capping the decay on the util signal. This >> > should greatly improve the ramp-up scenario and cure some other wobbles. >> > >> > The decay can be set by changing the over-all pelt decay, if so desired. >> > >> >> Do you mean we might want to change the decay (make it different from >> ramp-up) once for all, or maybe we make it tunable so that we can >> address different power/perf requirements? > > So the limited decay would be the dominant factor in ramp-up time, > leaving the regular PELT period the dominant factor for ramp-down. > > (Note that the decay limit would only be applied on the per-task signal, > not the accumulated signal.)
What's the meaning of "signal" in this thread?
Regards, Wanpeng Li
| |