Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-24991-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <ZTz9RpZxfxysYCmt@gmail.com> <ZZwBi/YmnMqm7zrO@gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wgWcYX2oXKtgvNN2LLDXP7kXkbo-xTfumEjmPbjSer2RQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wiXpsxMcQb7MhL-AxOityTajK0G8eWeBOzX-qBJ9X2DSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wjK28MUqBZzBSMEM8vdJhDOuXGSWPmmp04GEt9CXtW6Pw@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZZ+ixagkxRPYyTCE@vingu-book> <CAHk-=wj75Er8k4QY-KF34NBCWkDpr3D26XptOpkfDcTyGEA7iA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=whK-cuBUQ2hECtkGu3LR-ipai+tmB85M=C7n3b1M8B4gQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKfTPtCnT9VLqiQGL5kyhzqv=WAUNRA3tVDVoKjB7jX-00Un+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <4405adb5-0b16-4716-9542-47d8bb1737ee@arm.com> <20240112181805.bjvrkvvkszdfa7co@airbuntu>
In-Reply-To: <20240112181805.bjvrkvvkszdfa7co@airbuntu>
From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2024 20:03:36 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKfTPtBQZcDpiPMF2sjJopNueMe+Lv0cziPzAMAaxH1XbfHiUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Scheduler changes for v6.8
To: Qais Yousef <qyousef@layalina.io>
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>, 
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, 
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>, 
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, 
	Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>, Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 at 19:18, Qais Yousef <qyousef@layalina.io> wrote:
>
> On 01/12/24 15:23, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> > On 11/01/2024 19:16, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 at 18:53, Linus Torvalds
> > > <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 at 09:45, Linus Torvalds
> > >> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 at 00:11, Vincent Guittot
> > >>> <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Could you confirm that cpufreq governor is schedutil and the driver is
> > >>>> amd-pstate on your system ?
> > >>>
> > >>> schedutil yes, amd-pstate no. I actually just use acpi_cpufreq
> > >>
> > >> Bah. Hit 'send' mistakenly too soon, thus the abrupt end and
> > >> unfinished quoting removal.
> > >>
> > >> And don't ask me why it's acpi_pstate-driven. I have X86_AMD_PSTATE=y, but
> > >>
> > >>     /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy0/scaling_driver
> > >>
> > >> clearly says 'acpi-cpufreq'. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong place. My dmesg says
> > >
> > > That seems to be the right place to look
> > >
> > >>
> > >>     amd_pstate: the _CPC object is not present in SBIOS or ACPI disabled
> > >>
> > >> which is presumably the reason my machine uses acpi-pstate.
> > >>
> > >> I will also test out your other questions, but I need to go back and
> > >> do more pull requests first.
> > >
> > > ok, thanks
> > >
> > > I'm going to continue checking what else could trigger such regression
> > > having in mind that your system should not have beeb impacted by this
> > > changes
> >
> > I can't see the regression on my
> >
> >   20-core (40-thread) Intel Xeon CPU E5-2690 v2
> >
> > with 'schedutil' and 'acpi-cpufreq'.
>
> I tried to reproduce on AMD 3900X 12-Core system. I don't see any difference
> in compiling defconfig with and without the two patches reverted. ~1m26s.

Thanks for testing.
I haven't been able to reproduce the problem too. But my system are
quite different

>
> using schedutil and acpi-cpufreq driver too.
>
> I disabled CONFIG_UCLAMP_TASK and that didn't make a difference.
>
> I would have expected the iowait boost to be the more troublesome being the
> more subtle one tbh.