From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87A6028FA for ; Sun, 14 Jan 2024 13:02:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6D5A1FB; Sun, 14 Jan 2024 05:03:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.88] (unknown [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DF8283F73F; Sun, 14 Jan 2024 05:02:47 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <711c20cf-4aa7-4380-b076-195736bc4978@arm.com> Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2024 14:02:46 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Scheduler changes for v6.8 Content-Language: en-US To: Wyes Karny , Vincent Guittot Cc: Linus Torvalds , Qais Yousef , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Juri Lelli , Steven Rostedt , Ben Segall , Mel Gorman , Daniel Bristot de Oliveira , Valentin Schneider References: <20240114091240.xzdvqk75ifgfj5yx@wyes-pc> <20240114123759.pjs7ctexcpc6pshl@wyes-pc> From: Dietmar Eggemann In-Reply-To: <20240114123759.pjs7ctexcpc6pshl@wyes-pc> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 14/01/2024 13:37, Wyes Karny wrote: > On Sun, Jan 14, 2024 at 12:18:06PM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote: >> Hi Wyes, >> >> Le dimanche 14 janv. 2024 � 14:42:40 (+0530), Wyes Karny a �crit : >>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 02:57:14PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: >>>> On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 at 14:41, Linus Torvalds >>>> wrote: [...] > Yeah, correct something was wrong in the bpftrace readings, max_cap is > not zero in traces. > > git-5511 [001] d.h1. 427.159763: get_next_freq.constprop.0: [DEBUG] : freq 1400000, util 1024, max 1024 > git-5511 [001] d.h1. 427.163733: sugov_get_util: [DEBUG] : util 1024, sg_cpu->util 1024 > git-5511 [001] d.h1. 427.163735: get_next_freq.constprop.0: [DEBUG] : freq 1400000, util 1024, max 1024 > git-5511 [001] d.h1. 427.167706: sugov_get_util: [DEBUG] : util 1024, sg_cpu->util 1024 > git-5511 [001] d.h1. 427.167708: get_next_freq.constprop.0: [DEBUG] : freq 1400000, util 1024, max 1024 > git-5511 [001] d.h1. 427.171678: sugov_get_util: [DEBUG] : util 1024, sg_cpu->util 1024 > git-5511 [001] d.h1. 427.171679: get_next_freq.constprop.0: [DEBUG] : freq 1400000, util 1024, max 1024 > git-5511 [001] d.h1. 427.175653: sugov_get_util: [DEBUG] : util 1024, sg_cpu->util 1024 > git-5511 [001] d.h1. 427.175655: get_next_freq.constprop.0: [DEBUG] : freq 1400000, util 1024, max 1024 > git-5511 [001] d.s1. 427.175665: sugov_get_util: [DEBUG] : util 1024, sg_cpu->util 1024 > git-5511 [001] d.s1. 427.175665: get_next_freq.constprop.0: [DEBUG] : freq 1400000, util 1024, max 1024 > > Debug patch applied: > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c > index 95c3c097083e..5c9b3e1de7a0 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c > @@ -166,6 +166,7 @@ static unsigned int get_next_freq(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, > > freq = get_capacity_ref_freq(policy); > freq = map_util_freq(util, freq, max); > + trace_printk("[DEBUG] : freq %llu, util %llu, max %llu\n", freq, util, max); > > if (freq == sg_policy->cached_raw_freq && !sg_policy->need_freq_update) > return sg_policy->next_freq; > @@ -199,6 +200,7 @@ static void sugov_get_util(struct sugov_cpu *sg_cpu, unsigned long boost) > util = max(util, boost); > sg_cpu->bw_min = min; > sg_cpu->util = sugov_effective_cpu_perf(sg_cpu->cpu, util, min, max); > + trace_printk("[DEBUG] : util %llu, sg_cpu->util %llu\n", util, sg_cpu->util); > } > > /** > > > So, I guess map_util_freq going wrong somewhere. sugov_update_single_freq() -> get_next_freq() -> get_capacity_ref_freq() Is arch_scale_freq_invariant() true in both cases, so that get_capacity_ref_freq() returns 'policy->cpuinfo.max_freq' and not just 'policy->cur'?