Re: [PATCH 5/8] sched/cpufreq: pass sched class into cpufreq_update_util
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Wed Mar 16 2016 - 09:23:29 EST
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 01:39:10PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 09:29:59AM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>> >> I wonder if it's really worth passing per sched_class request to
>> >> sched_util ? sched_util is about selecting a frequency based on the
>> >> utilization of the CPU, it only needs a value that reflect the whole
>> >> utilization. Can't we sum (or whatever the formula we want to apply)
>> >> utilizations before calling cpufreq_update_util
>> >
>> > So I've thought the same; but I'm conflicted, its a shame to compute
>> > anything if the call then doesn't do anything with it.
>> >
>> > And keeping a structure of all the various numbers to pass in also has
>> > cost of yet another cacheline to touch.
>>
>> In principle we can use high-order bits of util and max to encode the
>> information on where they come from.
>>
>> Of course, that translates to additional ifs in the governor, but I
>> guess they are unavoidable anyway.
>
> Another thing we can do, for as long as we have the indirect function
> call anyway, is stuff extra pointers in that same cacheline we pull the
> function from.
>
> Something like the below; there's room for 8 pointers (including the
> function pointer) in a cacheline.
>
> That would allow the callback to fetch whatever data it feels is
> required (could be all of it).
>
> We could also put a u64 *now = &rq->clock in, which would leave another
> 4 pointers for DL/RT support.
>
> And since we're then back to 1-2 arguments on the function, we can add a
> flags/mask field to indicate what changed (and if the function
> throttles, it can keep a mask of all that changed since last time it
> actually did something, or allow punching through the throttle if our
> minimum guarantee changes or whatnot).
>
> (this would of course require we allocate struct update_util_data with
> the proper alignment thingies etc..)
>
> Then again, maybe this is somewhat overboard :-)
I was thinking about something along these lines, but then I thought
that passing in registers would be more efficient.
One advantage I can see here is that we don't pass arguments that may
not be used by the callee.
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index ba49c9efd0b2..d34d75c5cc93 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -3236,8 +3236,10 @@ static inline unsigned long rlimit_max(unsigned int limit)
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ
> struct update_util_data {
> - void (*func)(struct update_util_data *data,
> - u64 time, unsigned long util, unsigned long max);
> + unsigned long *cfs_util_avg;
> + unsigned long *cfs_util_max;
> +
> + void (*func)(struct update_util_data *data, u64 time);
> };
How do we ensure proper alignment?
> void cpufreq_set_update_util_data(int cpu, struct update_util_data *data);
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq.c
> index 928c4ba32f68..de5b20b11de3 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq.c
> @@ -32,6 +32,9 @@ void cpufreq_set_update_util_data(int cpu, struct update_util_data *data)
> if (WARN_ON(data && !data->func))
> return;
>
> + data->cfs_util_avg = &cpu_rq(cpu)->cfs.avg.util_avg;
> + data->cfs_util_max = &cpu_rq(cpu)->cpu_capacity_orig;
> +
> rcu_assign_pointer(per_cpu(cpufreq_update_util_data, cpu), data);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpufreq_set_update_util_data);