From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Alex Shi <alex.shi@linaro.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cpuidle/menu: stop seeking deeper idle if current state is too deep
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2017 10:43:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1483631039.25514.1.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1483630187-29622-2-git-send-email-alex.shi@linaro.org>
On Thu, 2017-01-05 at 23:29 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> The obsolete commit 71abbbf85 want to introduce a dynamic cstates,
> but it was removed for long time. Just left the nonsense deeper
> cstate
> checking.
>
> Since all target_residency and exit_latency are going longer in
> deeper
> idle state, no needs to waste some cpu cycle on useless seeking.
Makes me wonder if it would be worth documenting the
requirement that c-states be listed in increasing
order?
Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-05 15:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1483630187-29622-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@linaro.org>
2017-01-05 15:29 ` [PATCH 1/3] cpuidle/menu: stop seeking deeper idle if current state is too deep Alex Shi
2017-01-05 15:29 ` Alex Shi
2017-01-05 15:43 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2017-01-05 15:55 ` Arjan van de Ven
2017-01-05 15:29 ` [PATCH 2/3] cpu: expose pm_qos_resume_latency for each cpu Alex Shi
2017-01-05 15:29 ` Alex Shi
2017-01-11 8:09 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-01-11 14:33 ` Alex Shi
2017-01-11 18:40 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-01-12 13:04 ` Alex Shi
2017-01-05 15:29 ` [PATCH 3/3] cpuidle/menu: add per cpu pm_qos_resume_latency consideration Alex Shi
2017-01-05 15:29 ` Alex Shi
2017-01-05 15:48 ` [PATCH 0/3] per cpu resume latency Alex Shi
2017-01-10 8:02 ` Alex Shi
2017-01-19 21:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-01-12 13:27 [PATCH v2 " Alex Shi
2017-01-12 13:27 ` [PATCH 1/3] cpuidle/menu: stop seeking deeper idle if current state is too deep Alex Shi
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=1483631039.25514.1.camel@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=alex.shi@linaro.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/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.