From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pg1-f175.google.com (mail-pg1-f175.google.com [209.85.215.175]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CEA3717543 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 13:26:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="hiqZXOS9" Received: by mail-pg1-f175.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-5cdbc4334edso3784841a12.3 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 05:26:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; t=1705325193; x=1705929993; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=IyOnHF1CwJGniYfmRqVSgo2mTJwZim+cx2rzTCphPsU=; b=hiqZXOS9bmKtuzLCgOndl3imhuDBz0TCrrtHtlicmROABPachWU6jLPX4WeoVzeuWf rx8+2W06xqDX2ytT7oPoPETXzG8DraERCJ/eboXcUDsU0H8Ng+7ybsCGnBDpKLOW1fa7 FlXlmQkf5FBUUOsnfanFjt9HsttVqaBNVebRbKHkY1fecA3cffhU2OJRWav+HZuncAm9 gCyTugDhzpwo/hWo8Z1xy78yuTJWpf0Yq6a+zX5qTDnQdNhyEv8BhJbLeDVwwBKQdh7U cIDoSOaN6F/1DlGW5Nsc9ClwWOIDa/dGSHkafL2mC+aARg8DKiq2fy1IFD13xbgYMBeV uv2w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1705325193; x=1705929993; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=IyOnHF1CwJGniYfmRqVSgo2mTJwZim+cx2rzTCphPsU=; b=Ne3t/ysuXidFhpytNt0svibvQVzvw7jm9Z3q/h3EEKlAJ88ZS0JSR/Qv4PdSNCcfB/ EGy86fsOO2F1ToPrF79cfULAAvgb5FCHmt+yniXmMddX9ZLn3J5U83azbeGJtl2EcHNb lhll4Am65di+XnB3DItwqGw5r2FMjIjl+84Mvld46ECqZuJs3oX2Fwa7953Vq6AwJ+rF sA3VGtEptiBQL4zFHDGBM28FiNcOW9J3lnct7XR/K3e5z+JTMavS2oSREwyVooUuruIW 6spAn/3steriEMKSSIrdKJkLoLeAOUqfdILF9ALtSI2vcFhdq2imEurcMt7KRp/vA0uy dyOQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yyiv5ftbD2Z4zilZNOMEhI+Dp8Xc8UJ8CUlXedQ44HHuM0V2VTw oqacRMJG7ZEpcQQ9HpexXOstcW2cOv5NJBvAYO1gaOJF3xJVdg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHpfSLUAMUz2mTi0nD3uyJwZKJ+1gc5br6HLQh44twTJk1Ii97wz9TzoMBvTsR5ICJ2Rv6W5yU7Fe8iembBKb8= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:c90d:b0:28a:325d:1ed8 with SMTP id v13-20020a17090ac90d00b0028a325d1ed8mr2527052pjt.26.1705325193217; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 05:26:33 -0800 (PST) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20240114091240.xzdvqk75ifgfj5yx@wyes-pc> <20240114123759.pjs7ctexcpc6pshl@wyes-pc> <20240114151250.5wfexq44o3mdm3nh@airbuntu> <20240114195815.nes4bn53tc25djbh@airbuntu> <20240115120915.fukpcdumntdsllwi@airbuntu> In-Reply-To: <20240115120915.fukpcdumntdsllwi@airbuntu> From: Vincent Guittot Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2024 14:26:21 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Scheduler changes for v6.8 To: Qais Yousef Cc: Wyes Karny , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Juri Lelli , Dietmar Eggemann , Steven Rostedt , Ben Segall , Mel Gorman , Daniel Bristot de Oliveira , Valentin Schneider Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 at 13:09, Qais Yousef wrote: > > On 01/15/24 09:21, Vincent Guittot wrote: > > > > Or I've done the math wrong :-) But the two don't behave the same for the same > > > kernel with and without CPPC. > > > > They will never behave the same because they can't > > - with invariance, the utilization is the utilization at max capacity > > so we can easily jump several OPP to go directly to the right one > > - without invariance, the utilization is the utilization at current > > OPP so we can only jump to a limited number of OPP > > I am probably missing some subtlty, but the behavior looks more sensible to > me when we divide by current capacity instead of max one. > > It seems what you're saying is that the capacity range for each OPP is 0-1024. Yes that's the case when you don't have frequency invariance > And that's when we know that we saturated the current capacity level we decide > to move on. yes > > As I am trying to remove the hardcoded headroom values I am wary of another > one. But it seems this is bandaid scenario anyway; so maybe I shouldn't worry > too much about it. > > > Cheers > > -- > Qais Yousef