From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB965C48BD1 for ; Thu, 10 Jun 2021 12:53:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9B1F613C0 for ; Thu, 10 Jun 2021 12:53:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230293AbhFJMzU (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jun 2021 08:55:20 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:59212 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229937AbhFJMzS (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jun 2021 08:55:18 -0400 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 0B68F106F; Thu, 10 Jun 2021 05:53:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.57.4.220] (unknown [10.57.4.220]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2C24F3F73D; Thu, 10 Jun 2021 05:53:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sched/fair: Take thermal pressure into account while estimating energy To: Vincent Guittot Cc: Dietmar Eggemann , linux-kernel , "open list:THERMAL" , Peter Zijlstra , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar , Quentin Perret , Vincent Donnefort , Beata Michalska , Ingo Molnar , Juri Lelli , Steven Rostedt , segall@google.com, Mel Gorman , Daniel Bristot de Oliveira References: <20210604080954.13915-1-lukasz.luba@arm.com> <20210604080954.13915-2-lukasz.luba@arm.com> <2f2fc758-92c6-5023-4fcb-f9558bf3369e@arm.com> <905f1d29-50f9-32be-4199-fc17eab79d04@arm.com> <3cfa5690-644b-ba80-3fc3-7c5a3f292e70@arm.com> From: Lukasz Luba Message-ID: <80283949-8a07-5aed-1e56-0a1094ba3ba0@arm.com> Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 13:53:15 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 6/10/21 1:40 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote: > On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 at 14:30, Lukasz Luba wrote: [snip] >> >> So for this scenario, where we want to just align EAS with SchedUtil >> frequency decision, which is instantaneous and has 'raw' value >> of capping from policy->max, shouldn't we use: >> >> thermal_pressure = arch_scale_thermal_pressure(cpu_id) > > Yes you should probably use arch_scale_thermal_pressure(cpu) instead > of thermal_load_avg(rq) in this case > Thank you Vincent for valuable opinions! I will rewrite it and experiment with a new approach, then send a v3. Regards, Lukasz