sched/deadline: Move CPU frequency selection triggering points
Since SCHED_DEADLINE doesn't track utilization signal (but reserves a fraction of CPU bandwidth to tasks admitted to the system), there is no point in evaluating frequency changes during each tick event. Move frequency selection triggering points to where running_bw changes. Co-authored-by: Claudio Scordino <claudio@evidence.eu.com> Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Rafael J . Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: alessio.balsini@arm.com Cc: bristot@redhat.com Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: joelaf@google.com Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: mathieu.poirier@linaro.org Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org Cc: tkjos@android.com Cc: tommaso.cucinotta@santannapisa.it Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20171204102325.5110-3-juri.lelli@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
d4edd662ac
commit
e0367b1267
|
@ -86,6 +86,8 @@ void add_running_bw(u64 dl_bw, struct dl_rq *dl_rq)
|
|||
dl_rq->running_bw += dl_bw;
|
||||
SCHED_WARN_ON(dl_rq->running_bw < old); /* overflow */
|
||||
SCHED_WARN_ON(dl_rq->running_bw > dl_rq->this_bw);
|
||||
/* kick cpufreq (see the comment in kernel/sched/sched.h). */
|
||||
cpufreq_update_util(rq_of_dl_rq(dl_rq), SCHED_CPUFREQ_DL);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
static inline
|
||||
|
@ -98,6 +100,8 @@ void sub_running_bw(u64 dl_bw, struct dl_rq *dl_rq)
|
|||
SCHED_WARN_ON(dl_rq->running_bw > old); /* underflow */
|
||||
if (dl_rq->running_bw > old)
|
||||
dl_rq->running_bw = 0;
|
||||
/* kick cpufreq (see the comment in kernel/sched/sched.h). */
|
||||
cpufreq_update_util(rq_of_dl_rq(dl_rq), SCHED_CPUFREQ_DL);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
static inline
|
||||
|
@ -1134,9 +1138,6 @@ static void update_curr_dl(struct rq *rq)
|
|||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/* kick cpufreq (see the comment in kernel/sched/sched.h). */
|
||||
cpufreq_update_util(rq, SCHED_CPUFREQ_DL);
|
||||
|
||||
schedstat_set(curr->se.statistics.exec_max,
|
||||
max(curr->se.statistics.exec_max, delta_exec));
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -2055,14 +2055,14 @@ DECLARE_PER_CPU(struct update_util_data *, cpufreq_update_util_data);
|
|||
* The way cpufreq is currently arranged requires it to evaluate the CPU
|
||||
* performance state (frequency/voltage) on a regular basis to prevent it from
|
||||
* being stuck in a completely inadequate performance level for too long.
|
||||
* That is not guaranteed to happen if the updates are only triggered from CFS,
|
||||
* though, because they may not be coming in if RT or deadline tasks are active
|
||||
* all the time (or there are RT and DL tasks only).
|
||||
* That is not guaranteed to happen if the updates are only triggered from CFS
|
||||
* and DL, though, because they may not be coming in if only RT tasks are
|
||||
* active all the time (or there are RT tasks only).
|
||||
*
|
||||
* As a workaround for that issue, this function is called by the RT and DL
|
||||
* sched classes to trigger extra cpufreq updates to prevent it from stalling,
|
||||
* As a workaround for that issue, this function is called periodically by the
|
||||
* RT sched class to trigger extra cpufreq updates to prevent it from stalling,
|
||||
* but that really is a band-aid. Going forward it should be replaced with
|
||||
* solutions targeted more specifically at RT and DL tasks.
|
||||
* solutions targeted more specifically at RT tasks.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
static inline void cpufreq_update_util(struct rq *rq, unsigned int flags)
|
||||
{
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue