From: cov@codeaurora.org (Christopher Covington)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/2] ARM: Remove any correlation between IPC and BogoMips value
Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 11:48:26 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5189224A.70501@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130507090849.GC25387@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com>
On 05/07/2013 05:08 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 07:01:23PM +0100, Christopher Covington wrote:
>> Hi Will,
>>
>> On 05/03/2013 01:35 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> This small patch set may look a little over a month late, but there is a
>>> serious reason for posting it.
>>>
>>> When I moved the ARM delay loop over to using the architected timers
>>> rather than the CPU spinning loop (which has all the problems associated
>>> with cpu frequency scaling and what-not) I thought I was doing something
>>> useful for the port. However, it turns out that a surprising number of
>>> people have complained, and continue to complain, about the drop in
>>> their `BogoMIPs score'.
>>
>> Have you considered adding the old code back in, but in a form that's not at
>> all referenced by the delay loop code and just calculates CPU-based bogomips?
>
> That seems like a lot of effort in order to preserve something that isn't
> even meaningful. We might be better just zeroing the value, but then we'll
> inevitably get bug reports of it being `wrong'.
If I were in to filing bug reports about bogomips values, I would be just as
likely to do it for 1, 10000, 99999, and get_random_bytes(...) as for 0.
> Plus, the calibration during boot introduces a brief delay when onlining
> each core whereas this can be skipped when using a constant timer.
If it were configurable, that might give people a reason to weigh whether they
really cared about knowing bogomips at the cost of boot time.
Christopher
--
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by the Linux Foundation.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christopher Covington <cov@codeaurora.org>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@arm.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] ARM: Remove any correlation between IPC and BogoMips value
Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 11:48:26 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5189224A.70501@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130507090849.GC25387@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com>
On 05/07/2013 05:08 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 07:01:23PM +0100, Christopher Covington wrote:
>> Hi Will,
>>
>> On 05/03/2013 01:35 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> This small patch set may look a little over a month late, but there is a
>>> serious reason for posting it.
>>>
>>> When I moved the ARM delay loop over to using the architected timers
>>> rather than the CPU spinning loop (which has all the problems associated
>>> with cpu frequency scaling and what-not) I thought I was doing something
>>> useful for the port. However, it turns out that a surprising number of
>>> people have complained, and continue to complain, about the drop in
>>> their `BogoMIPs score'.
>>
>> Have you considered adding the old code back in, but in a form that's not at
>> all referenced by the delay loop code and just calculates CPU-based bogomips?
>
> That seems like a lot of effort in order to preserve something that isn't
> even meaningful. We might be better just zeroing the value, but then we'll
> inevitably get bug reports of it being `wrong'.
If I were in to filing bug reports about bogomips values, I would be just as
likely to do it for 1, 10000, 99999, and get_random_bytes(...) as for 0.
> Plus, the calibration during boot introduces a brief delay when onlining
> each core whereas this can be skipped when using a constant timer.
If it were configurable, that might give people a reason to weigh whether they
really cared about knowing bogomips at the cost of boot time.
Christopher
--
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by the Linux Foundation.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-07 15:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-03 17:35 [RFC PATCH 0/2] ARM: Remove any correlation between IPC and BogoMips value Will Deacon
2013-05-03 17:35 ` Will Deacon
2013-05-03 17:35 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] ARM: delay: print dummy values for bogomips Will Deacon
2013-05-03 17:35 ` Will Deacon
2013-05-06 23:16 ` Pavel Machek
2013-05-06 23:16 ` Pavel Machek
2013-05-07 8:17 ` Marc Zyngier
2013-05-07 8:17 ` Marc Zyngier
2013-05-14 19:54 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-05-14 19:54 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-05-14 22:23 ` Rob Herring
2013-05-14 22:23 ` Rob Herring
2013-05-14 23:56 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-05-14 23:56 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-05-15 9:01 ` Will Deacon
2013-05-15 9:01 ` Will Deacon
2013-05-15 11:47 ` Pavel Machek
2013-05-15 11:47 ` Pavel Machek
2013-05-15 12:34 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-05-15 12:34 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-05-20 9:59 ` Pavel Machek
2013-05-20 9:59 ` Pavel Machek
2013-05-03 17:35 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] init: calibrate: don't print out bogomips value on boot Will Deacon
2013-05-03 17:35 ` Will Deacon
2013-05-06 18:01 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] ARM: Remove any correlation between IPC and BogoMips value Christopher Covington
2013-05-06 18:01 ` Christopher Covington
2013-05-07 9:08 ` Will Deacon
2013-05-07 9:08 ` Will Deacon
2013-05-07 15:48 ` Christopher Covington [this message]
2013-05-07 15:48 ` Christopher Covington
2013-05-08 9:06 ` Will Deacon
2013-05-08 9:06 ` Will Deacon
2013-05-13 15:14 ` Christopher Covington
2013-05-13 15:14 ` Christopher Covington
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=5189224A.70501@codeaurora.org \
--to=cov@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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.