Revert "sched: Introduce temporary FAIR_GROUP_SCHED dependency for load-tracking"

Remove CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED that covers the runnable info, then
we can use runnable load variables.

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: set initial value of runnable avg for new forked task

We need initialize the se.avg.{decay_count, load_avg_contrib} for a
new forked task.
Otherwise random values of above variables cause mess when do new task
enqueue:
    enqueue_task_fair
        enqueue_entity
            enqueue_entity_load_avg

and make forking balancing imbalance since incorrect load_avg_contrib.

set avg.decay_count = 0, and avg.load_avg_contrib = se->load.weight to
resolve such issues.

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: add sched balance policies in kernel

Current scheduler behavior is just consider for larger performance
of system. So it try to spread tasks on more cpu sockets and cpu cores

To adding the consideration of power awareness, the patchset adds
a powersaving scheduler policy. It will use runnable load util in
scheduler balancing. The current scheduling is taken as performance
policy.

performance: the current scheduling behaviour, try to spread tasks
                on more CPU sockets or cores. performance oriented.
powersaving: will pack tasks into few sched group until all LCPU in the
                group is full, power oriented.

The incoming patches will enable powersaving scheduling in CFS.

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: add sysfs interface for sched_balance_policy selection

This patch add the power aware scheduler knob into sysfs:

$cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/sched_balance_policy/available_sched_balance_policy
performance powersaving
$cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/sched_balance_policy/current_sched_balance_policy
powersaving

This means the using sched balance policy is 'powersaving'.

User can change the policy by commend 'echo':
 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/sched_balance_policy/current_sched_balance_policy

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: log the cpu utilization at rq

The cpu's utilization is to measure how busy is the cpu.
        util = cpu_rq(cpu)->avg.runnable_avg_sum * SCHED_POEWR_SCALE
                / cpu_rq(cpu)->avg.runnable_avg_period;

Since the util is no more than 1, we scale its value with 1024, same as
SCHED_POWER_SCALE and set the FULL_UTIL as 1024.

In later power aware scheduling, we are sensitive for how busy of the
cpu. Since as to power consuming, it is tight related with cpu busy
time.

BTW, rq->util can be used for any purposes if needed, not only power
scheduling.

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: add new sg/sd_lb_stats fields for incoming fork/exec/wake balancing

For power aware balancing, we care the sched domain/group's utilization.
So add: sd_lb_stats.sd_util and sg_lb_stats.group_util.

And want to know which group is busiest but still has capability to
handle more tasks, so add: sd_lb_stats.group_leader

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: move sg/sd_lb_stats struct ahead

Power aware fork/exec/wake balancing needs both of structs in incoming
patches. So move ahead before it.

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: scale_rt_power rename and meaning change

The scale_rt_power() used to represent the left CPU utilization
after reduce rt utilization. so named it as scale_rt_power has a bit
inappropriate.

Since we need to use the rt utilization in some incoming patches, we
just change return value of this function to rt utilization, and
rename it as scale_rt_util(). Then, its usage is changed in
update_cpu_power() accordingly.

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: get rq potential maximum utilization

Since the rt task priority is higher than fair tasks, cfs_rq utilization
is just the left of rt utilization.

When there are some cfs tasks in queue, the potential utilization may
be yielded, so mulitiplying cfs task number to get max potential
utilization of cfs.

Thanks for Paul Turner and Namhyung's reminder!

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: add power aware scheduling in fork/exec/wake

This patch add power aware scheduling in fork/exec/wake. It try to
select cpu from the busiest while still has utilization group. That's
will save power since it leaves more groups idle in system.

The trade off is adding a power aware statistics collection in group
seeking. But since the collection just happened in power scheduling
eligible condition, the worst case of hackbench testing just drops
about 2% with powersaving policy. No clear change for performance
policy.

The main function in this patch is get_cpu_for_power_policy(), that
will try to get a idlest cpu from the busiest while still has
utilization group, if the system is using power aware policy and
has such group.

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: add sched_burst_threshold_ns as wakeup burst indicator

rq->avg_idle is 'to used to accommodate bursty loads in a dirt simple
dirt cheap manner' -- Mike Galbraith.

With this cheap and smart bursty indicator, we can find the wake up
burst, and just use nr_running as instant utilization only.

The 'sysctl_sched_burst_threshold' used for wakeup burst, since we will
check every cpu's avg_idle, the value get be more precise, set 0.1ms.

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: using avg_idle to detect bursty wakeup

Sleeping task has no utiliation, when they were bursty waked up, the
zero utilization make scheduler out of balance, like aim7 benchmark.

rq->avg_idle is 'to used to accommodate bursty loads in a dirt simple
dirt cheap manner' -- Mike Galbraith.

With this cheap and smart bursty indicator, we can find the wake up
burst, and use nr_running as instant utilization in this scenario.

For other scenarios, we still use the precise CPU utilization to
judage if a domain is eligible for power scheduling.

Thanks for Mike Galbraith's idea!
Thanks for Namhyung's suggestion to compact the burst into
max_cfs_util()!

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: packing transitory tasks in wakeup power balancing

If the waked task is transitory enough, it will has a chance to be
packed into a cpu which is busy but still has time to care it.

For powersaving policy, only the history util < 25% task has chance to
be packed. If there is no cpu eligible to handle it, will use a idlest
cpu in leader group.

Morten Rasmussen catch a type bug. And PeterZ reminder to consider
rt_util. thanks you!

Inspired-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: add power/performance balance allow flag

If a sched domain is idle enough for regular power balance, LBF_POWER_BAL
will be set, LBF_PERF_BAL will be clean. If a sched domain is busy,
their value will be set oppositely.

If the domain is suitable for power balance, but balance should not
be down by this cpu(this cpu is already idle or full), both of flags
are cleared to wait a suitable cpu to do power balance.
That mean no any balance, neither power balance nor performance balance
will be done on this cpu.

Above logical will be implemented by incoming patches.

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: pull all tasks from source group

In power balance, we hope some sched groups are fully empty to save
CPU power of them. So, we want to move any tasks from them.

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: no balance for prefer_sibling in power scheduling

In power aware scheduling, we don't want to balance 'prefer_sibling'
groups just because local group has capacity.
If the local group has no tasks at the time, that is the power
balance hope so.

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: add new members of sd_lb_stats

Added 4 new members in sb_lb_stats, that will be used in incomming
power aware balance.

group_min; 	//least utliszation group in domain
min_load_per_task; //load_per_task in group_min
leader_util;	// sum utilizations of group_leader
min_util;	// sum utilizations of group_min

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: power aware load balance

This patch enabled the power aware consideration in load balance.

As mentioned in the power aware scheduler proposal, Power aware
scheduling has 2 assumptions:
1, race to idle is helpful for power saving
2, less active sched_groups will reduce power consumption

The first assumption make performance policy take over scheduling when
any scheduler group is busy.
The second assumption make power aware scheduling try to pack disperse
tasks into fewer groups.

The enabling logical summary here:
1, Collect power aware scheduler statistics during performance load
balance statistics collection.
2, If the balance cpu is eligible for power load balance, just do it
and forget performance load balance. If the domain is suitable for
power balance, but the cpu is inappropriate(idle or full), stop both
power/performance balance in this domain.
3, If using performance balance policy or using power balance but any
group is busy, do performance balance.

Above logical is mainly implemented in update_sd_lb_power_stats(). It
decides if a domain is suitable for power aware scheduling. If so,
it will fill the dst group and source group accordingly.

This patch reused some of Suresh's power saving load balance code.

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: lazy power balance

When active task number in sched domain waves around the power friendly
scheduling creteria, scheduling will thresh between the power friendly
balance and performance balance, bring unnecessary task migration.
The typical benchmark is 'make -j x'.

To remove such issue, introduce a u64 perf_lb_record variable to record
performance load balance history. If there is no performance LB for
continuing 32 times load balancing, or no LB for 8 times max_interval ms,
or only 4 times performance LB in last 64 times load balancing, then we
accept a power friendly LB. Otherwise, give up this time power friendly
LB chance, do nothing.

With this patch, the worst case for power scheduling -- kbuild, gets
similar performance/watts value among different policy.

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
sched: don't do power balance on share cpu power domain

Packing tasks among such domain can't save power, just performance
losing. So no power balance on them.

Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>