eas-dev

eas-dev@lists.linaro.org

310 discussions

[Integration Branch] Update 22-Dec-2017

by Dietmar Eggemann

Hi, a new EAS integration branch (tag: 20171222_1000) is available on: http://linux-arm.org/git?p=linux-power.git News: Frequency and CPU Invariance (FIE/CIE) now in base Bugfixes from android.googlesource.com/kernel/common experimental/android-4.14 (1) 'sched: Per-Sched-domain over utilization' now compiles w/ !CONFIG_SMP (2) 'drivers base/arch_topology: Detect SD_SHARE_CAP_STATES flag' now compiles w/ !CONFIG_CPU_FREQ For further information about main features, test coverage and work items for next integration please have a look at: https://developer.arm.com/open-source/energy-aware-scheduling/eas-mainline-… Best Regards, -- Dietmar

8 years, 10 months

[PATCH RESEND] cpufreq: schedutil: Use idle_calls counter of the remote CPU

by Joel Fernandes

Since the recent remote cpufreq callback work, its possible that a cpufreq update is triggered from a remote CPU. For single policies however, the current code uses the local CPU when trying to determine if the remote sg_cpu entered idle or is busy. This is incorrect. To remedy this, compare with the nohz tick idle_calls counter of the remote CPU. Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar(a)linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joelaf(a)google.com> --- Just resending this which is cpufreq-related as requested by Rafael rebased on linus/master. The other 2 patches in my last series which can go in independent of this one are: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10115395/ https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10115401/ I'm still waiting on scheduler maintainers to comment on those. Unfortunately, I haven't heard back anything yet since the last repost of those. include/linux/tick.h | 1 + kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 2 +- kernel/time/tick-sched.c | 13 +++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/include/linux/tick.h b/include/linux/tick.h index f442d1a42025..7cc35921218e 100644 --- a/include/linux/tick.h +++ b/include/linux/tick.h @@ -119,6 +119,7 @@ extern void tick_nohz_idle_exit(void); extern void tick_nohz_irq_exit(void); extern ktime_t tick_nohz_get_sleep_length(void); extern unsigned long tick_nohz_get_idle_calls(void); +extern unsigned long tick_nohz_get_idle_calls_cpu(int cpu); extern u64 get_cpu_idle_time_us(int cpu, u64 *last_update_time); extern u64 get_cpu_iowait_time_us(int cpu, u64 *last_update_time); #else /* !CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON */ diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c index 2f52ec0f1539..d6717a3331a1 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ static void sugov_iowait_boost(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu, unsigned long *util, #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON static bool sugov_cpu_is_busy(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu) { - unsigned long idle_calls = tick_nohz_get_idle_calls(); + unsigned long idle_calls = tick_nohz_get_idle_calls_cpu(sg_cpu->cpu); bool ret = idle_calls == sg_cpu->saved_idle_calls; sg_cpu->saved_idle_calls = idle_calls; diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c index 99578f06c8d4..77555faf6fbc 100644 --- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c +++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c @@ -985,6 +985,19 @@ ktime_t tick_nohz_get_sleep_length(void) return ts->sleep_length; } +/** + * tick_nohz_get_idle_calls_cpu - return the current idle calls counter value + * for a particular CPU. + * + * Called from the schedutil frequency scaling governor in scheduler context. + */ +unsigned long tick_nohz_get_idle_calls_cpu(int cpu) +{ + struct tick_sched *ts = tick_get_tick_sched(cpu); + + return ts->idle_calls; +} + /** * tick_nohz_get_idle_calls - return the current idle calls counter value * -- 2.15.1.504.g5279b80103-goog

8 years, 10 months

[PATCH v2] sched/fair: Consider RT/IRQ pressure in capacity_spare_wake

by Joel Fernandes

capacity_spare_wake in the slow path influences choice of idlest groups, as we search for groups with maximum spare capacity. In scenarios where RT pressure is high, a sub optimal group can be chosen and hurt performance of the task being woken up. This is fixed in this patch by using capacity_of instead of capacity_orig_of in capacity_spare_wake. Only change since v1 is change in commit message. Tests results from improvements with this change are below. More tests were also done by myself and Matt Fleming to ensure no degradation in different benchmarks. 1) Rohit ran barrier.c test (details below) with following improvements: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This was Rohit's original use case for a patch he posted at [1] however from his recent tests he showed my patch can replace his slow path changes [1] and there's no need to selectively scan/skip CPUs in find_idlest_group_cpu in the slow path to get the improvement he sees. barrier.c (open_mp code) as a micro-benchmark. It does a number of iterations and barrier sync at the end of each for loop. Here barrier,c is running in along with ping on CPU 0 and 1 as: 'ping -l 10000 -q -s 10 -f hostX' barrier.c can be found at: http://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2506955.html Following are the results for the iterations per second with this micro-benchmark (higher is better), on a 44 core, 2 socket 88 Threads Intel x86 machine: +--------+------------------+---------------------------+ |Threads | Without patch | With patch | | | | | +--------+--------+---------+-----------------+---------+ | | Mean | Std Dev | Mean | Std Dev | +--------+--------+---------+-----------------+---------+ |1 | 539.36 | 60.16 | 572.54 (+6.15%) | 40.95 | |2 | 481.01 | 19.32 | 530.64 (+10.32%)| 56.16 | |4 | 474.78 | 22.28 | 479.46 (+0.99%) | 18.89 | |8 | 450.06 | 24.91 | 447.82 (-0.50%) | 12.36 | |16 | 436.99 | 22.57 | 441.88 (+1.12%) | 7.39 | |32 | 388.28 | 55.59 | 429.4 (+10.59%)| 31.14 | |64 | 314.62 | 6.33 | 311.81 (-0.89%) | 11.99 | +--------+--------+---------+-----------------+---------+ 2) ping+hackbench test on bare-metal sever (by Rohit) ----------------------------------------------------- Here hackbench is running in threaded mode along with, running ping on CPU 0 and 1 as: 'ping -l 10000 -q -s 10 -f hostX' This test is running on 2 socket, 20 core and 40 threads Intel x86 machine: Number of loops is 10000 and runtime is in seconds (Lower is better). +--------------+-----------------+--------------------------+ |Task Groups | Without patch | With patch | | +-------+---------+----------------+---------+ |(Groups of 40)| Mean | Std Dev | Mean | Std Dev | +--------------+-------+---------+----------------+---------+ |1 | 0.851 | 0.007 | 0.828 (+2.77%)| 0.032 | |2 | 1.083 | 0.203 | 1.087 (-0.37%)| 0.246 | |4 | 1.601 | 0.051 | 1.611 (-0.62%)| 0.055 | |8 | 2.837 | 0.060 | 2.827 (+0.35%)| 0.031 | |16 | 5.139 | 0.133 | 5.107 (+0.63%)| 0.085 | |25 | 7.569 | 0.142 | 7.503 (+0.88%)| 0.143 | +--------------+-------+---------+----------------+---------+ [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9991635/ Matt Fleming also ran several different hackbench tests and cyclic test to santiy-check that the patch doesn't harm other usecases. Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot(a)linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann(a)arm.com> Tested-by: Matt Fleming <matt(a)codeblueprint.co.uk> Tested-by: Rohit Jain <rohit.k.jain(a)oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joelaf(a)google.com> --- kernel/sched/fair.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c index 0989676c50e9..832f2ea069ef 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c @@ -5726,7 +5726,7 @@ static int cpu_util_wake(int cpu, struct task_struct *p); static unsigned long capacity_spare_wake(int cpu, struct task_struct *p) { - return capacity_orig_of(cpu) - cpu_util_wake(cpu, p); + return max_t(long, capacity_of(cpu) - cpu_util_wake(cpu, p), 0); } /* -- 2.15.1.504.g5279b80103-goog

8 years, 10 months

[PATCH] sched/fair: Consider RT/IRQ pressure in capacity_spare_wake

by Joel Fernandes

capacity_spare_wake in the slow path influences choice of idlest groups, as we search for groups with maximum spare capacity. In scenarios where RT pressure is high, a sub optimal group can be chosen and hurt performance of the task being woken up. Several tests with results are included below to show improvements with this change. 1) Hackbench on Pixel 2 Android device (4x4 ARM64 Octa core) ------------------------------------------------------------ Here we have RT activity running on big CPU cluster induced with rt-app, and running hackbench in parallel. The RT tasks are bound to 4 CPUs on the big cluster (cpu 4,5,6,7) and have 100ms periodicity with runtime=20ms sleep=80ms. Hackbench shows big benefit (30%) improvement when number of tasks is 8 and 32: Note: data is completion time in seconds (lower is better). Number of loops for 8 and 16 tasks is 50000, and for 32 tasks its 20000. +--------+-----+-------+-------------------+---------------------------+ | groups | fds | tasks | Without Patch | With Patch | +--------+-----+-------+---------+---------+-----------------+---------+ | | | | Mean | Stdev | Mean | Stdev | | | | +-------------------+-----------------+---------+ | 1 | 8 | 8 | 1.0534 | 0.13722 | 0.7293 (+30.7%) | 0.02653 | | 2 | 8 | 16 | 1.6219 | 0.16631 | 1.6391 (-1%) | 0.24001 | | 4 | 8 | 32 | 1.2538 | 0.13086 | 1.1080 (+11.6%) | 0.16201 | +--------+-----+-------+---------+---------+-----------------+---------+ 2) Rohit ran barrier.c test (details below) with following improvements: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This was Rohit's original use case for a patch he posted at [1] however from his recent tests he showed my patch can replace his slow path changes [1] and there's no need to selectively scan/skip CPUs in find_idlest_group_cpu in the slow path to get the improvement he sees. barrier.c (open_mp code) as a micro-benchmark. It does a number of iterations and barrier sync at the end of each for loop. Here barrier,c is running in along with ping on CPU 0 and 1 as: 'ping -l 10000 -q -s 10 -f hostX' barrier.c can be found at: http://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2506955.html Following are the results for the iterations per second with this micro-benchmark (higher is better), on a 44 core, 2 socket 88 Threads Intel x86 machine: +--------+------------------+---------------------------+ |Threads | Without patch | With patch | | | | | +--------+--------+---------+-----------------+---------+ | | Mean | Std Dev | Mean | Std Dev | +--------+--------+---------+-----------------+---------+ |1 | 539.36 | 60.16 | 572.54 (+6.15%) | 40.95 | |2 | 481.01 | 19.32 | 530.64 (+10.32%)| 56.16 | |4 | 474.78 | 22.28 | 479.46 (+0.99%) | 18.89 | |8 | 450.06 | 24.91 | 447.82 (-0.50%) | 12.36 | |16 | 436.99 | 22.57 | 441.88 (+1.12%) | 7.39 | |32 | 388.28 | 55.59 | 429.4 (+10.59%)| 31.14 | |64 | 314.62 | 6.33 | 311.81 (-0.89%) | 11.99 | +--------+--------+---------+-----------------+---------+ 3) ping+hackbench test on bare-metal sever (Rohit ran this test) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Here hackbench is running in threaded mode along with, running ping on CPU 0 and 1 as: 'ping -l 10000 -q -s 10 -f hostX' This test is running on 2 socket, 20 core and 40 threads Intel x86 machine: Number of loops is 10000 and runtime is in seconds (Lower is better). +--------------+-----------------+--------------------------+ |Task Groups | Without patch | With patch | | +-------+---------+----------------+---------+ |(Groups of 40)| Mean | Std Dev | Mean | Std Dev | +--------------+-------+---------+----------------+---------+ |1 | 0.851 | 0.007 | 0.828 (+2.77%)| 0.032 | |2 | 1.083 | 0.203 | 1.087 (-0.37%)| 0.246 | |4 | 1.601 | 0.051 | 1.611 (-0.62%)| 0.055 | |8 | 2.837 | 0.060 | 2.827 (+0.35%)| 0.031 | |16 | 5.139 | 0.133 | 5.107 (+0.63%)| 0.085 | |25 | 7.569 | 0.142 | 7.503 (+0.88%)| 0.143 | +--------------+-------+---------+----------------+---------+ [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9991635/ Matt Fleming also ran cyclictest and several different hackbench tests on his test machines to santiy-check that the patch doesn't harm any of his usecases. Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann(a)arm.com> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot(a)linaro.org> Cc: Morten Ramussen <morten.rasmussen(a)arm.com> Cc: Brendan Jackman <brendan.jackman(a)arm.com> Tested-by: Rohit Jain <rohit.k.jain(a)oracle.com> Tested-by: Matt Fleming <matt(a)codeblueprint.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joelaf(a)google.com> --- kernel/sched/fair.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c index 56f343b8e749..ba9609407cb9 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c @@ -5724,7 +5724,7 @@ static int cpu_util_wake(int cpu, struct task_struct *p); static unsigned long capacity_spare_wake(int cpu, struct task_struct *p) { - return capacity_orig_of(cpu) - cpu_util_wake(cpu, p); + return max_t(long, capacity_of(cpu) - cpu_util_wake(cpu, p), 0); } /* -- 2.15.0.448.gf294e3d99a-goog

8 years, 10 months

[util_est] Backport to Hikey960 v4.9 kernel

by Patrick Bellasi

Hi guys, I've just pushed here: git://linux-arm.org/linux-pb.git eas/v1.5/util_est/hikey960 a backport of the util_est patches [1] recently posted on LKML. Apart from the util_est specific patches, this branch is based on top of some patches (suggested by Linaro) to improve power/performance testing on Hikey960. Moreover, at the top there are some additional patches to test with different PELT half-life values. In attachment you can also find a "series file" which can be used with LISA's wltest. Unfortunately, so fare there have not been much review feedbacks on LKML. Would be nice if someone interested can give it a go and report on the list. Cheers Patrick [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/12/5/634 -- #include <best/regards.h> Patrick Bellasi

8 years, 10 months

Energy Model Question regarding the Pixel 2

by Zachariah Kennedy

Good day! I have noticed since release that EM for the Pixel 2 doesnt cover each frequency step. 22 steps for small cores, 31 steps for big cores. There are 22 tuples for the small cores but only 27 tuples for big cores. I have checked and the Pixel 2 is using all frequency steps for both small and big cores, so why doesnt the EM account for the last 4 freq steps for big cores? Thanks as always for taking the time to answer my questions. Kind Regards, Zachariah Kennedy

8 years, 10 months

[Integration Branch] Update 24-Nov-2017

by Michele DiGiorgio

Hello EAS developers, This email is to inform you about the latest EAS integration branch that was published last Friday. All the information on where to get the branch from are available at: https://developer.arm.com/open-source/energy-aware-scheduling/EAS%20Mainlin… The integration branch was conceived to keep the latest EAS patches on track with tip/sched/core. Hence, on top of that the integration branch puts: - some new scheduler features, i.e. patches that relate to scheduler but are not main components of EAS - EAS-core patches - debug patches, i.e. trace events, procfs interfaces, etc. Integration will happen every two weeks. The above website covers the main additions to each integration and the next work items for the ones that will follow. Kind regards, Michele

8 years, 10 months

An update on EAS development branches

by Chris Redpath

Hello eas-dev! I'm pleased to announce that EAS development is moving to the next version of the android common kernel, android-4.9. * EAS development will be done in a new android-4.9-eas-dev branch * android-4.9-eas-dev will be merged into android-4.9 twice during the period January - June 2018 * EAS functionality in android-4.4 is frozen * an android-4.4-eas-test branch is provided to help testing new EAS features on android-4.4 devices * assembly of an android common kernel based upon 4.14 is underway Q&A: * Why have you moved to android-4.9? * Partners developing devices have largely completed their android-4.4 derived device kernels and continuous development of EAS features is disruptive to tuning efforts * Device kernels derived from android-4.9 are in active development * Will you deliver new EAS patches to android-4.4? * The plan is to only do fixes for critical bugs for android-4.4 * How will you be confident your patches are OK when you don't have devices running android-4.9 kernels yet? * This is the reason that the android-4.4-eas-test branch exists * This branch will contain patches which are merged into android-4.9-eas-dev and can be used to help test on device kernels derived from android-4.4 * The content will be whatever patches are necessary to be able to add patches from android-4.9-eas-dev cleanly, plus the patches from android-4.9-eas-dev * android-4.4-eas-test will be updated until we have a product quality device for testing with android-4.9 derived kernels * What is the expected patch flow for testing eas-dev patches on android-4.4? * first cherry-pick the patches from android-4.4-eas-test to the device kernel * next cherry-pick in-development patches from android-4.9-eas-dev gerrit reviews * run tests to obtain power and performance numbers from real product-quality environments * How critical are you going to be for patches sent to android-4.9-eas-dev? * Patches accepted there must be of good code quality and have at least one of the four necessary attributes: 1. Must reduce energy consumption 2. Must improve performance 3. Must bring android EAS closer to mainline 4. Must fix a bug * All patches must pass checkpatch.pl * Given that you intend to merge android-4.9-eas-dev into android-4.9, will you freeze it at any time? * Yes. The intention is to have a 1 month stabilization ahead of each merge (January and June) * For the January merge, stabilization will begin December 1st, 2017. * For the June merge, stabilization will begin May 1st, 2018 * During stabilization, only fixes will be taken * Will there be merges in-between January and June? * We do not plan to do this right now, but in principle it can be done * When will android-4.4-eas-test update after android-4.9-eas-dev merges into android-4.9? * We intend to add patches to android-4.4-eas-test for review soon after merging them * What happens if there is a bug in the merged branch? * A fix will be provided to android-4.9 and android-4.9-eas-dev * The fix will be reflected in android-4.4-eas-test * Can I expect this to happen again any time soon? * Yes, there has been a new android common kernel based on a new LTS branch each year so far * Arm expects that pattern to continue * If the pattern holds, in October 2018 the target android kernel version for EAS development will be based on Linux 4.14 * We currently plan to use the same branching structure with the version numbers changed * Dates are projections based upon previous android releases and are subject to change * The kernel versions of eas-dev and eas-test branches are driven by the availability of suitable development and testing platforms, so are also subject to change * What happens when you move to a 4.14 kernel? * After changes are reviewed and merged into android-4.9 from android-4.9-eas-test, those changes will be pushed for review on the 4.14 android branch * Anything merged in android's 4.14 branch which is broken will also be patched Warmest Regards, Chris Redpath Open Source Software Power Team @ arm

8 years, 11 months

[PATCH RFC 0/5] sched and cpufreq fixes/cleanups

by Joel Fernandes

Here are some patches that are generally minor changes and I am posting them together. Patches 1/5 and 2/5 are related to skipping cpufreq updates for the dequeue of the last task before the CPU enters idle. That's just a rebase of [1] mostly. Patches 3/5 and 4/5 fix some minor things I noticed after the remote cpufreq update work. and patch 5/5 is just a small clean up of find_idlest_group. Let me know your thoughts and thanks. I've based these patches on peterz's queue.git master branch. [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9936555/ Joel Fernandes (5): Revert "sched/fair: Drop always true parameter of update_cfs_rq_load_avg()" sched/fair: Skip frequency update if CPU about to idle cpufreq: schedutil: Use idle_calls counter of the remote CPU sched/fair: Correct obsolete comment about cpufreq_update_util sched/fair: remove impossible condition from find_idlest_group_cpu include/linux/tick.h | 1 + kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 2 +- kernel/sched/fair.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ kernel/sched/sched.h | 1 + kernel/time/tick-sched.c | 13 ++++++++++++ 5 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) -- 2.15.0.rc2.357.g7e34df9404-goog

8 years, 11 months

EAS r1.4 release

by Ian Rickards

ARM has released EAS r1.4. The main changes in this release are: EAS refactoring improvements Fixes to sched-freq for big.LITTLE platforms Upstream PELT and load balance improvements Upstream schedutil changes Cumulative Runnable Average signal for OPP selection when using WALT Improved WALT integration with EAS Linux-4.4 version is merged into AOSP common kernel 4.4: https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/common/+/android-4.4 Linux-4.9 version is merged into AOSP common kernel 4.9: https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/common/+/android-4.9 Release documentation is here: https://developer.arm.com/-/media/developer/developers/open-source/energy-a… Basic testing on ARM Juno & Hikey960 using LISA tests -- ARM powersoftware team

8 years, 11 months

← Newer
1
...
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
...
31
Older →

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

eas-dev