From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, arjan@linux.intel.com,
len.brown@intel.com, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] cpuidle: small improvements & fixes for menu governor (resend)
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 21:26:48 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <563C0FE8.8070301@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1547516.IzrSrfmAQk@vostro.rjw.lan>
On 11/05/2015 05:34 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 03, 2015 05:34:16 PM riel@redhat.com wrote:
>> While working on a paravirt cpuidle driver for KVM guests, I
>> noticed a number of small logic errors in the menu governor
>> code.
>>
>> These patches should get rid of some artifacts that can break
>> the logic in the menu governor under certain corner cases, and
>> make idle state selection work better on CPUs with long C1 exit
>> latencies.
>>
>> I have not seen any adverse effects with them in my (quick)
>> tests. As expected, they do not seem to do much on systems with
>> many power states and very low C1 exit latencies and target residencies.
>
> Thanks!
>
> The patches look good to me.
>
> I might apply [1-2/3] right away, but I'm a bit hesitant about the [3/3] (I'd
> like it to spend some time in linux-next before it goes to Linus). Also, we've
> lived without these changes for quite some time and I don't want to stretch the
> process too much, so I'll queue them up for v4.5 if that's not a problem.
Not a problem at all. I am all for taking these changes carefully,
and seeing what happens.
I did some basic testing with it, but the permutations of what
can happen with cpuidle management are just too many to predict
in advance everything that could happen.
--
All rights reversed
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-06 2:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-03 22:34 [PATCH 0/3] cpuidle: small improvements & fixes for menu governor (resend) riel
2015-11-03 22:34 ` [PATCH 1/3] cpuidle,x86: increase forced cut-off for polling to 20us riel
2015-11-04 16:00 ` Arjan van de Ven
2015-11-03 22:34 ` [PATCH 2/3] cpuidle,menu: use interactivity_req to disable polling riel
2015-11-04 16:01 ` Arjan van de Ven
2016-01-13 17:27 ` Sudeep Holla
2016-01-13 21:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-01-13 22:07 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-01-14 10:40 ` Sudeep Holla
2016-01-15 0:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-01-14 10:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2015-11-03 22:34 ` [PATCH 3/3] cpuidle,menu: smooth out measured_us calculation riel
2015-11-04 16:02 ` Arjan van de Ven
2015-11-05 22:34 ` [PATCH 0/3] cpuidle: small improvements & fixes for menu governor (resend) Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-11-06 2:26 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
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=563C0FE8.8070301@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
/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.