On 07/12/2020 13:17, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 03-12-20, 12:54, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
>> On 24/11/2020 07:26, Viresh Kumar wrote:
[...]
>> When I ran schbench (-t 16 -r 5) on hikey960 I get multiple (~50)
>> instances of ~80ms task activity phase and then ~20ms idle phase on all
>> CPUs.
>>
>> So I assume that scenario 1 is at the beginning (but you mentioned the
>> task were sleeping?)
>
> I am not able to find the exact values I used, but I did something
> like this to create a scenario where the old computations shall find
> the CPU as idle in the last IPA window:
>
> - schbench -m 2 -t 4 -s 25000 -c 20000 -r 60
>
> - sampling rate of IPA to 10 ms
>
> With this IPA wakes up many times and finds the CPUs to have been idle
> in the last IPA window (i.e. 10ms).
Ah, this makes sense.
So with this there are only 8 worker threads w/ 20ms runtime and 75ms
period (30ms message thread time (-C) and 25 latency (-c)).
So much more idle time between two invocations of the worker/message
threads and more IPA sampling.
[...]
>>> Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000
>>> total_load=800 load={{0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64}}
>>> dynamic_power=5280
>>> New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000
>>> total_load=708 load={{0x4d,0x5c,0x5c,0x5b,0x5c,0x5c,0x51,0x5b}}
>>> dynamic_power=4672
>>>
>>> As can be seen, the idle time based load is 100% for all the CPUs as it
>>> took only the last window into account, but in reality the CPUs aren't
>>> that loaded as shown by the utilization numbers.
>>
>> Is this an IPA sampling at the end of the ~20ms idle phase?
>
> This is during the phase where the CPUs were fully busy for the last
> period.
OK.
