Niraj Tolia wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 2:02 AM, Liu, Jinsong <jinsong.liu@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>> Niraj,
>>
>> Any update about xen cpufreq at your platform? Does the patch work?
>>
>
> Hi Jinsong,
>
> Yup, it does seem to work. I will let you know if I run into any
> other issues.
>
> Cheers,
> Niraj
Glad to see it work at your platform.
2 valuable results are:
- SW_ANY coordination has been tested in your platform and find a px statistic
bug (I don't have this kind of platform);
- The correctness of cpufreq I/O control method has been tested in your
platform (again, all my test platform is MSR control);
Thank you very much!
Jinsong
>
>> Thanks,
>> Jinsong
>>
>> Niraj Tolia wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 7:19 PM, Niraj Tolia <ntolia@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Tian, Kevin <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> From: Niraj Tolia [mailto:ntolia@xxxxxxxxx]
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 2:01 AM
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 10:59 PM, Yu, Ke <ke.yu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>> After discussing with Jinsong, we got the root cause. You
>>>>>> are right, this is xen pm statistics logic issue. when the
>>>>>> coordination type is SW_ANY, we only record the first CPU
>>>>>> cpufreq change, the other 3 cores within the same dependency
>>>>>> domain is ignored, so you only see one core changes every
>>>>>> dependency domain.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The attached patch fix this issue. could you please have a
>>>>>> try? If it works in your platform, we will send out for
>>>>>> applying in upstream.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just applied the patch and while xenpm might be doing the right
>>>>>> thing, I am not completely sure. For example, if I launch a
>>>>>> single VCPU VM, pin it to a core, and launch a CPU intensive
>>>>>> task on it, ALL four cores on the socket are reported to switch
>>>>>> into P0. However, from what I understand about this processor
>>>>>> (Xeon E7330), only two of them should. Like vanilla Linux, the
>>>>>> other two should be able to operate at independent
>>>>>> voltage/frequency settings. Once again, I am not sure if this is
>>>>>> xenpm's fault or if the underlying frequency control code isn't
>>>>>> able to determine what CPUs need to switch frequency at the
>>>>>> same time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you change any BIOS setting when comparing native Linux and
>>>>> Xen? From the xen dmesg you posted last time:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, I did not change anything in the BIOS. However, when I run
>>>> vanilla Linux w/ cpufreqd, cpufreq-info will only list two cores
>>>> being tied together. This is with the 2.6.24-21 kernel provided
>>>> with Ubuntu
>>>> 8.04.1.
>>>>
>>>> # cpufreq-info
>>>> cpufrequtils 002: cpufreq-info (C) Dominik Brodowski 2004-2006
>>>> Report errors and bugs to linux@xxxxxxxx, please.
>>>> analyzing CPU 0:
>>>> driver: acpi-cpufreq
>>>> CPUs which need to switch frequency at the same time: 0 4
>>>> hardware limits: 1.60 GHz - 2.40 GHz
>>>> available frequency steps: 2.40 GHz, 2.13 GHz, 1.87 GHz, 1.60 GHz
>>>> available cpufreq governors: powersave, conservative, ondemand,
>>>> userspace, performance current policy: frequency should be within
>>>> 1.60 GHz and 1.60 GHz. The governor "powersave"
>>>> may decide which speed to use within this range.
>>>> current CPU frequency is 1.60 GHz.
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>
>>> I just noticed that cpufreq-info only lists 8 CPUs. Turns out that
>>> Ubuntu's kernels come with NR_CPUS = 8. So, you might be right. I
>>> will try and recompile a vanilla kernel tomorrow to see what
>>> happens.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Niraj
>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> NIraj
>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>> (XEN) _PSD: num_entries=5 rev=0 domain=1 coord_type=253
>>>>> num_processors=4 ... (XEN) _PSD: num_entries=5 rev=0 domain=2
>>>>> coord_type=253 num_processors=4 ... (XEN) _PSD: num_entries=5
>>>>> rev=0 domain=3 coord_type=253 num_processors=4 ... You can see
>>>>> that BIOS reports 4 processors in a dependent domain
>>>>> with a SW_ANY coordination type. It means that any cpu within
>>>>> given dependent domain changes freq, all the rest 3 cpus change
>>>>> too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Kevin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Niraj Tolia, Researcher, HP Labs
>>>> http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Niraj_Tolia/
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home