From: Luis Machado <luis.machado@arm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
bristot@redhat.com, vschneid@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kprateek.nayak@amd.com,
wuyun.abel@bytedance.com, tglx@linutronix.de, efault@gmx.de,
nd <nd@arm.com>, John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>,
Hongyan.Xia2@arm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 08/10] sched/fair: Implement delayed dequeue
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 11:15:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <afc5b30f-8540-4fc9-a271-af3c5ee55340@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240425104220.GE21980@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 4/25/24 11:42, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 04:15:42PM +0100, Luis Machado wrote:
>
>>> Bisecting through the patches in this series, I ended up with patch 08/10
>>> as the one that improved things overall for these benchmarks.
>>>
>>> I'd like to investigate this further to understand the reason behind some of
>>> these dramatic improvements.
>>>
>>
>> Investigating these improvements a bit more, I noticed they came with a significantly
>> higher power usage on the Pixel6 (where EAS is enabled). I bisected it down to the delayed
>> dequeue patch. Disabling DELAY_DEQUEUE and DELAY_ZERO at runtime doesn't help in bringing
>> the power usage down.
>
> Hmm, that is unexpected. The intent was for NO_DELAY_DEQUEUE to fully
> disable things. I'll go have a prod at it.
I'm running a few more numbers to confirm this situation with the feature switches.
>
>> Though I don't fully understand the reason behind this change in behavior yet, I did spot
>> the benchmark processes running almost entirely on the big core cluster, with little
>> to no use of the little core and mid core clusters.
>>
>> That would explain higher power usage and also the significant jump in performance.
>
> ISTR you (arm) has these tools to trace and plot the varioud util
> values. This should be readily reflected there if that is the case, no?
Indeed we do, but I'm still in the process of compiling those numbers into a meaningful plot,
so I'm afraid I don't have those handy yet, sorry.
>
>> I wonder if the delayed dequeue logic is having an unwanted effect on the calculation of
>> utilization/load of the runqueue and, as a consequence, we're scheduling things to run on
>> higher OPP's in the big cores, leading to poor decisions for energy efficiency.
>
> Notably util_est_update() gets delayed. Given we don't actually do an
> enqueue when a delayed task gets woken, it didn't seem to make sense to
> update that sooner.
>
> I'll go over all that again
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-26 10:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-05 10:27 [RFC][PATCH 00/10] sched/fair: Complete EEVDF Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 10:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 01/10] sched/eevdf: Add feature comments Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 10:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 02/10] sched/eevdf: Remove min_vruntime_copy Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 10:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 03/10] sched/fair: Cleanup pick_task_fair() vs throttle Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 21:11 ` Benjamin Segall
2024-04-05 10:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 04/10] sched/fair: Cleanup pick_task_fair()s curr Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 10:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 05/10] sched/fair: Unify pick_{,next_}_task_fair() Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-06 2:20 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-05 10:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 06/10] sched: Allow sched_class::dequeue_task() to fail Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 10:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 07/10] sched/fair: Re-organize dequeue_task_fair() Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 10:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 08/10] sched/fair: Implement delayed dequeue Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-06 9:23 ` Chen Yu
2024-04-08 9:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-11 1:32 ` Yan-Jie Wang
2024-04-25 10:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-12 10:42 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-04-15 10:56 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-16 3:18 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-04-16 5:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-18 16:24 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-18 17:08 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-04-24 15:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-25 11:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-26 10:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-26 11:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-26 16:03 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-27 6:42 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-28 16:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-29 12:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-15 17:07 ` Luis Machado
2024-04-24 15:15 ` Luis Machado
2024-04-25 10:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-25 11:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-26 9:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-26 9:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-26 10:16 ` Luis Machado
2024-04-29 14:33 ` Luis Machado
2024-05-02 10:26 ` Luis Machado
2024-05-10 14:49 ` Luis Machado
2024-05-15 9:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-05-15 11:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-05-15 18:03 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-26 10:15 ` Luis Machado [this message]
2024-04-20 5:57 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-22 13:13 ` Tobias Huschle
2024-04-05 10:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 09/10] sched/eevdf: Allow shorter slices to wakeup-preempt Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 10:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 10/10] sched/eevdf: Use sched_attr::sched_runtime to set request/slice suggestion Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-06 8:16 ` Hillf Danton
2024-05-07 5:34 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-05-15 10:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-05-07 15:15 ` Chen Yu
2024-05-08 13:52 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-05-09 3:48 ` Chen Yu
2024-05-09 5:00 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-05-13 4:07 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-05-14 9:18 ` Chen Yu
2024-05-14 15:23 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-05-14 16:15 ` Chen Yu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=afc5b30f-8540-4fc9-a271-af3c5ee55340@arm.com \
--to=luis.machado@arm.com \
--cc=Hongyan.Xia2@arm.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=jstultz@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nd@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=wuyun.abel@bytedance.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.