Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: schedutil: Fix superfluous updates caused by need_freq_update

[Christian Loehle]

On 12/12/24 01:57, Sultan Alsawaf wrote:
> From: "Sultan Alsawaf (unemployed)" <sultan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> A redundant frequency update is only truly needed when there is a policy
> limits change with a driver that specifies CPUFREQ_NEED_UPDATE_LIMITS.
> 
> In spite of that, drivers specifying CPUFREQ_NEED_UPDATE_LIMITS receive a
> frequency update _all the time_, not just for a policy limits change,
> because need_freq_update is never cleared.
> 
> Furthermore, ignore_dl_rate_limit()'s usage of need_freq_update also leads
> to a redundant frequency update, regardless of whether or not the driver
> specifies CPUFREQ_NEED_UPDATE_LIMITS, when the next chosen frequency is the
> same as the current one.
> 
> Fix the superfluous updates by only honoring CPUFREQ_NEED_UPDATE_LIMITS
> when there's a policy limits change, and clearing need_freq_update when a
> requisite redundant update occurs.
> 
> This is neatly achieved by moving up the CPUFREQ_NEED_UPDATE_LIMITS test
> and instead setting need_freq_update to false in sugov_update_next_freq().
>

Good catch!
Fixes:
600f5badb78c ("cpufreq: schedutil: Don't skip freq update when limits change")


> Signed-off-by: Sultan Alsawaf (unemployed) <sultan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Reviewed-by: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@xxxxxxx>

> ---
>  kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> index 28c77904ea74..e51d5ce730be 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static bool sugov_should_update_freq(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, u64 time)
>  
>  	if (unlikely(sg_policy->limits_changed)) {
>  		sg_policy->limits_changed = false;
> -		sg_policy->need_freq_update = true;
> +		sg_policy->need_freq_update = cpufreq_driver_test_flags(CPUFREQ_NEED_UPDATE_LIMITS);>  		return true;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ static bool sugov_update_next_freq(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, u64 time,
>  				   unsigned int next_freq)
>  {
>  	if (sg_policy->need_freq_update)
> -		sg_policy->need_freq_update = cpufreq_driver_test_flags(CPUFREQ_NEED_UPDATE_LIMITS);
> +		sg_policy->need_freq_update = false;
>  	else if (sg_policy->next_freq == next_freq)
>  		return false;

I guess you could rewrite this into just one if like

---

	if (sg_policy->next_freq == next_freq && !sg_policy->need_freq_update))
		return false;

	sg_policy->need_freq_update = false
	sg_policy->next_freq = next_freq;
	sg_policy->last_freq_update_time = time;