On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 09:01:13AM -0700, Michael Turquette wrote:
> Quoting Peter Zijlstra (2015-03-26 03:41:50)
> > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:21:24AM +, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > > - what about other sched classes? I know that this is very premature,
> > >but I can help but thinking that we
Quoting Peter Zijlstra (2015-03-26 03:41:50)
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:21:24AM +, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > - what about other sched classes? I know that this is very premature,
> >but I can help but thinking that we'll need to do some sort of
> >aggregation of requests, and if we put t
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 08:15:59PM +, Sai Gurrappadi wrote:
> On 03/16/2015 07:47 AM, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> > Again you are right. We could make the + task_utilization(p) conditional
> > on i != task_cpu(p). One argument against doing that is that in
> > select_task_rq_fair() task_utilizati
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:21:24AM +, Juri Lelli wrote:
> - what about other sched classes? I know that this is very premature,
>but I can help but thinking that we'll need to do some sort of
>aggregation of requests, and if we put triggers in very specialized
>points we might lose
On 25/03/15 18:14, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 06:01:22PM +, Juri Lelli wrote:
>
>> Yes and no, IMHO. It makes perfect sense to trigger cpufreq on the
>> target_cpu's freq domain, as we know that we are going to add p's
>> utilization there.
>
> Fair point; I mainly wanted
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 06:01:22PM +, Juri Lelli wrote:
> Yes and no, IMHO. It makes perfect sense to trigger cpufreq on the
> target_cpu's freq domain, as we know that we are going to add p's
> utilization there.
Fair point; I mainly wanted to start this discussion so that seems to
have been
Hi Peter,
On 24/03/15 16:35, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 06:31:10PM +, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
>> +static int energy_aware_wake_cpu(struct task_struct *p)
>> +{
>> +struct sched_domain *sd;
>> +struct sched_group *sg, *sg_target;
>> +int target_max_cap = SCHED_C
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 03:53:52PM +, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 03:42:42PM +, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> > Right, I agree that we should preferably do the normal thing for U ~= 1.
> > We can restructure the wake-up path to follow that pattern, but we need
> > to know U
On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 06:31:10PM +, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> +static int energy_aware_wake_cpu(struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + struct sched_domain *sd;
> + struct sched_group *sg, *sg_target;
> + int target_max_cap = SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE;
> + int target_cpu = task_cpu(p);
> +
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 03:42:42PM +, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> Right, I agree that we should preferably do the normal thing for U ~= 1.
> We can restructure the wake-up path to follow that pattern, but we need
> to know U beforehand to choose the right path. U isn't just
> get_cpu_usage(prev_c
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 01:00:58PM +, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 06:31:10PM +, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> > @@ -5138,6 +5224,10 @@ select_task_rq_fair(struct task_struct *p, int
> > prev_cpu, int sd_flag, int wake_f
> > prev_cpu = cpu;
> >
> > if (sd_f
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 01:00:00PM +, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 02:47:23PM +, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> > > Also, this heuristic for determining sg_target is a big little
> > > assumption. I don't think it is necessarily correct to assume that this
> > > is true for al
On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 06:31:10PM +, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> @@ -5138,6 +5224,10 @@ select_task_rq_fair(struct task_struct *p, int
> prev_cpu, int sd_flag, int wake_f
> prev_cpu = cpu;
>
> if (sd_flag & SD_BALANCE_WAKE) {
> + if (energy_aware()) {
> +
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 02:47:23PM +, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> > Also, this heuristic for determining sg_target is a big little
> > assumption. I don't think it is necessarily correct to assume that this
> > is true for all platforms. This heuristic should be derived from the
> > energy model
On 03/16/2015 07:47 AM, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 10:47:16PM +, Sai Gurrappadi wrote:
>> On 02/04/2015 10:31 AM, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
>>> +static int energy_aware_wake_cpu(struct task_struct *p)
>>> +{
>>> + struct sched_domain *sd;
>>> + struct sched_group *sg, *
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 10:47:16PM +, Sai Gurrappadi wrote:
> On 02/04/2015 10:31 AM, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> > +static int energy_aware_wake_cpu(struct task_struct *p)
> > +{
> > + struct sched_domain *sd;
> > + struct sched_group *sg, *sg_target;
> > + int target_max_cap = SCHED_CAPAC
On 02/04/2015 10:31 AM, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> Let available compute capacity and estimated energy impact select
> wake-up target cpu when energy-aware scheduling is enabled.
> energy_aware_wake_cpu() attempts to find group of cpus with sufficient
> compute capacity to accommodate the task and f
17 matches
Mail list logo
