From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
To: Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com>
Cc: Grazvydas Ignotas <notasas@gmail.com>,
linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>,
Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
Subject: Re: PM related performance degradation on OMAP3
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 15:03:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87sjg87gll.fsf@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F87276F.6070504@mlbassoc.com> (Gary Thomas's message of "Thu, 12 Apr 2012 13:05:19 -0600")
Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com> writes:
> On 2012-04-12 12:08, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> Gary Thomas<gary@mlbassoc.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 2012-04-12 10:57, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>>>> +Felipe for EHCI question
>>>>
>>>> Gary Thomas<gary@mlbassoc.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> This worked a treat, thanks. My network performance is better
>>>>> now, but still not what it was. The same TFTP transfer now takes
>>>>> 71 seconds, so about 50% slower than on the 3.0 kernel. Applying the
>>>>> second [unnamed] patch (arch/arm/mach-omap2/cpuidle34xx.c) made no difference.
>>>>
>>>> And does a CONFIG_PM=n kernel get you back to your v3.0 performance?
>>>
>>> Correct.
>>>
>>
>> OK, I just tried your TFTP experiment on a 3530/Overo board with the
>> same smsc911x NIC that has GPIO interrupts, and I don't see much
>> difference between a PM-enabled v3.0 and a PM-enabled v3.3.
>>
>> Are you TFTP'ing the file to an MMC filesystem? Can you try to a
>> ramdisk[1]? If you're using MMC, it could be MMC driver changes since
>> v3.0 that are actually causing your performance hit.
>
> I'm testing to a ramdisk, so we're on the same page.
>
> Could you send me your config file so I can compare? Maybe I have something
> "dumb" in my settings that aggravates things.
Below is the Kconfig snippet[1] I append to a default
omap2plus_defconfig to enable CPUidle, CPUfreq and some debug. Rebuild
with that appended and these settings override the default ones. I used
omap2plus_defcnfig plus this snippit for v3.0, v3.3 and v3.4-rc2 tests.
> Also, what's your performance on 3.4-rc2? The linux-media tree I started
> from is a bit post v3.3, so there might be something else causing this.
I just tried with vanilla v3.4-rc2, and I see basically the same
results. Between 35 and 50 seconds for the 24Mb file transfer, which is
similar to the v3.0 and v3.3 results.
Kevin
[1]
CONFIG_CPU_IDLE=y
CONFIG_PM_ADVANCED_DEBUG=y
CONFIG_PM_SLEEP_ADVANCED_DEBUG=y
CONFIG_PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS=y
CONFIG_OMAP_SMARTREFLEX=y
CONFIG_OMAP_SMARTREFLEX_CLASS3=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_TABLE=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_STAT=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_USERSPACE=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_USERSPACE=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_ONDEMAND=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_POWERSAVE=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_PERFORMANCE=y
CONFIG_ARM_OMAP2PLUS_CPUFREQ=y
CONFIG_REGULATOR_OMAP_SMPS=y
CONFIG_DEBUG_LL=y
CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE=y
CONFIG_DEBUG_USER=y
CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK=y
CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-12 22:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-06 22:50 PM related performance degradation on OMAP3 Grazvydas Ignotas
2012-04-09 19:03 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-04-11 0:29 ` Grazvydas Ignotas
2012-04-12 0:19 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-04-13 17:32 ` Grazvydas Ignotas
2012-04-13 19:32 ` Grazvydas Ignotas
2012-04-17 14:30 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-04-17 21:50 ` Grazvydas Ignotas
2012-04-18 0:36 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-04-24 9:50 ` Jean Pihet
2012-04-24 10:38 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2012-04-24 12:21 ` Tero Kristo
2012-04-24 12:50 ` Jean Pihet
2012-04-24 13:04 ` Tero Kristo
2012-04-24 14:29 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-05-01 14:10 ` Jean Pihet
2012-05-01 17:27 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-05-02 5:59 ` Paul Walmsley
2012-05-02 19:46 ` Jean Pihet
2012-05-07 17:31 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-05-09 11:00 ` Jean Pihet
2012-04-12 23:02 ` Woodruff, Richard
2012-04-11 14:59 ` Gary Thomas
2012-04-11 17:23 ` Grazvydas Ignotas
2012-04-11 18:20 ` Gary Thomas
2012-04-11 19:17 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-04-12 10:44 ` Gary Thomas
2012-04-12 14:14 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-04-12 15:28 ` Gary Thomas
2012-04-12 16:57 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-04-12 17:10 ` Gary Thomas
2012-04-12 18:08 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-04-12 19:05 ` Gary Thomas
2012-04-12 22:03 ` Kevin Hilman [this message]
2012-04-13 0:39 ` Gary Thomas
2012-04-13 9:13 ` Felipe Balbi
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=87sjg87gll.fsf@ti.com \
--to=khilman@ti.com \
--cc=balbi@ti.com \
--cc=gary@mlbassoc.com \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=notasas@gmail.com \
--cc=paul@pwsan.com \
/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.