Re: [PATCH v2] cpuidle: poll_state: Add time limit to poll_idle()

[Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 998 bytes --]

On Tue, 2018-03-27 at 18:42 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 5:32 PM, Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2018-03-14 at 13:04 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > 
> > > On x86 we don't have to use that time_check_counter thing,
> > > sched_clock()
> > > is really cheap, not sure if it makes sense on other platforms.
> > 
> > Are you sure? I saw a 5-10% increase in CPU use,
> > for a constant query rate to a memcache style
> > workload, with v3 of this patch.
> 
> I think I know what's going on.

I ran my tests wrong, and the script never propagated
errors back to me. Sigh.

However, the poll_idle() that reads the TSC at a
reduced rate seems to perform better than the one
that reads the TSC every time it goes around the
loop.

The size of the idle loop seems to make a slight
difference, too. Having just one cpu_relax() in
the entire loop seems to be better than having
them all over the place.

-- 
All Rights Reversed.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]