Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752438AbdGDRet (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2017 13:34:49 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:48184 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752395AbdGDRes (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2017 13:34:48 -0400 From: Patrick Bellasi To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Cc: Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar , Vincent Guittot , Juri Lelli , Joel Fernandes , Andres Oportus , Todd Kjos , Morten Rasmussen , Dietmar Eggemann Subject: [PATCH v2 6/6] cpufreq: schedutil: relax rate-limiting while running RT/DL tasks Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2017 18:34:11 +0100 Message-Id: <1499189651-18797-7-git-send-email-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.7.4 In-Reply-To: <1499189651-18797-1-git-send-email-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> References: <1499189651-18797-1-git-send-email-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3194 Lines: 85 The policy in use for RT/DL tasks sets the maximum frequency when a task in these classes calls for a cpufreq_update_this_cpu(). However, the current implementation is still enforcing a frequency switch rate limiting when these tasks are running. This is potentially working against the goal to switch to the maximum OPP when RT tasks are running. In certain unfortunate cases it can also happen that a RT task almost completes its activation at a lower OPP. This patch overrides on purpose the rate limiting configuration to better serve RT/DL tasks. As long as a frequency scaling operation is not in progress, a frequency switch is always authorized when running in "rt_mode", i.e. the current task in a CPU belongs to the RT/DL class. Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki Cc: Viresh Kumar Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org --- kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 19 ++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c index df433f1..7b1dc7e 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c @@ -72,7 +72,8 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct sugov_cpu, sugov_cpu); /************************ Governor internals ***********************/ -static bool sugov_should_update_freq(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, u64 time) +static bool sugov_should_update_freq(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, + u64 time, bool rt_mode) { s64 delta_ns; @@ -89,6 +90,10 @@ static bool sugov_should_update_freq(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, u64 time) return true; } + /* Always update if a RT/DL task is running */ + if (rt_mode) + return true; + delta_ns = time - sg_policy->last_freq_update_time; return delta_ns >= sg_policy->freq_update_delay_ns; } @@ -226,11 +231,6 @@ static void sugov_update_single(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time, sugov_set_iowait_boost(sg_cpu, time, flags); sg_cpu->last_update = time; - if (!sugov_should_update_freq(sg_policy, time)) - return; - - busy = sugov_cpu_is_busy(sg_cpu); - /* * While RT/DL tasks are running we do not want FAIR tasks to * overvrite this CPU's flags, still we can update utilization and @@ -239,6 +239,11 @@ static void sugov_update_single(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time, rt_mode = task_has_dl_policy(current) || task_has_rt_policy(current) || (flags & SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT_DL); + if (!sugov_should_update_freq(sg_policy, time, rt_mode)) + return; + + busy = sugov_cpu_is_busy(sg_cpu); + if (rt_mode) { next_f = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq; } else { @@ -336,7 +341,7 @@ static void sugov_update_shared(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time, sugov_set_iowait_boost(sg_cpu, time, flags); sg_cpu->last_update = time; - if (sugov_should_update_freq(sg_policy, time)) { + if (sugov_should_update_freq(sg_policy, time, rt_mode)) { next_f = rt_mode ? sg_policy->policy->cpuinfo.max_freq : sugov_next_freq_shared(sg_cpu, time); -- 2.7.4