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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20221206101021.18113-1-lukasz.luba@arm.com> <20221206101629.dbcuv3zdso44w3cq@vireshk-i7>
 <2a97cf28-7e47-04c7-edcb-41adbd20ccd9@arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <2a97cf28-7e47-04c7-edcb-41adbd20ccd9@arm.com>
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 6 Dec 2022 12:00:07 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0hRW2Px4LP9OCgFqyUQUiVr0xZL6dYPrWrmGerGqCq1PQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: Optimize operations with single max
 CPU capacity
To:     Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Cc:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        rafael@kernel.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
        vincent.guittot@linaro.org, saravanak@google.com,
        wusamuel@google.com, isaacmanjarres@google.com,
        kernel-team@android.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
        peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 11:30 AM Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12/6/22 10:16, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 06-12-22, 10:10, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> >> The max CPU capacity is the same for all CPUs sharing frequency domain
> >> and thus 'policy' object. There is a way to avoid heavy operations
> >> in a loop for each CPU by leveraging this knowledge. Thus, simplify
> >> the looping code in the sugov_next_freq_shared() and drop heavy
> >> multiplications. Instead, use simple max() to get the highest utilization
> >> from these CPUs. This is useful for platforms with many (4 or 6) little
> >> CPUs.
> >>
> >> The max CPU capacity must be fetched every time we are called, due to
> >> difficulties during the policy setup, where we are not able to get the
> >> normalized CPU capacity at the right time.
> >>
> >> The stored value in sugov_policy::max is also than used in
> >> sugov_iowait_apply() to calculate the right boost. Thus, that field is
> >> useful to have in that sugov_policy struct.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
> >
> > Can you please divide this into two patches, one for just moving max
> > and one for looping optimization ? Else we may end up reverting
> > everything once again.
> >
>
> OK, I can do that. Thanks for having a look!

Also, please note that this material is unlikely to go into 6.2, so
I'd prefer going back to it after 6.2-rc1 is out.