Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 9 Nov 2022 16:49:25 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Qais Yousef <qyousef@layalina.io>
Cc:     Kajetan Puchalski <kajetan.puchalski@arm.com>,
        Jian-Min Liu <jian-min.liu@mediatek.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
        Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@google.com>,
        Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>,
        Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@matbug.net>,
        Abhijeet Dharmapurikar <adharmap@quicinc.com>,
        Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Jonathan JMChen <jonathan.jmchen@mediatek.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/1] sched/pelt: Change PELT halflife at runtime
Message-ID: <Y2vMBWpPlIArwnI7@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20220829055450.1703092-1-dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
 <0f82011994be68502fd9833e499749866539c3df.camel@mediatek.com>
 <YzVpqweg21yIn30A@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <YzV9Gejo/+DL3UjK@e126311.manchester.arm.com>
 <YzV/yT6OYMgaq0kD@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <YzWuq5ShtJC6KWqe@e126311.manchester.arm.com>
 <Y2kLA8x40IiBEPYg@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20221108194843.i4qckcu7zwqstyis@airbuntu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20221108194843.i4qckcu7zwqstyis@airbuntu>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 07:48:43PM +0000, Qais Yousef wrote:
> On 11/07/22 14:41, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 03:41:47PM +0100, Kajetan Puchalski wrote:
> > 
> > > Based on all the tests we've seen, jankbench or otherwise, the
> > > improvement can mainly be attributed to the faster ramp up of frequency
> > > caused by the shorter PELT window while using schedutil.
> > 
> > Would something terrible like the below help some?
> > 
> > If not, I suppose it could be modified to take the current state as
> > history. But basically it runs a faster pelt sum along side the regular
> > signal just for ramping up the frequency.
> 
> A bit of a tangent, but this reminded me of this old patch:
> 
> 	https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1623855954-6970-1-git-send-email-yt.chang@mediatek.com/
> 
> I think we have a bit too many moving cogs that might be creating undesired
> compound effect.
> 
> Should we consider removing margins in favour of improving util ramp up/down?
> (whether via util_est or pelt hf).

Yeah, possibly.

So one thing that was key to that hack I proposed is that it is
per-task. This means we can either set or detect the task activation
period and use that to select an appropriate PELT multiplier.

But please explain; once tasks are in a steady state (60HZ, 90HZ or god
forbit higher), the utilization should be the same between the various
PELT window sizes, provided the activation period isn't *much* larger
than the window.

Are these things running a ton of single shot tasks or something daft
like that?