cpufreq.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	Dirk Brandewie <dirk.j.brandewie@intel.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	"cpufreq@vger.kernel.org" <cpufreq@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Change the calculation of next pstate
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 19:34:46 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <535FD4A6.3050905@semaphore.gr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKohpomhUk7RQ3YL3=wpVKSbK_oSkyYBRUZiqnHzWqrZ2DjRRA@mail.gmail.com>

On 29/04/2014 07:58 πμ, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Cc'd Dirk,
> 
> On 28 April 2014 03:42, Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr> wrote:
>> Currently the driver calculates the next pstate proportional to
>> core_busy factor and reverse proportional to current pstate.
>>
>> Change the above method and calculate the next pstate independently
>> of current pstate.
> 
> We must mention why the change is required.
> 

Hi Viresh,

Actually, I can't say that it's required. :)
I just believe that calculation of next p-state should be independent
from current one. In my opinion we can't scale the load across different
p-states, because it's not always equivalent.

For example suppose a load of 100% because of a tight for loop in the
current p-state. It will be also a 100% load in any other p-state.
It will be wrong if we scale the load in the calculation formula
according to the current p-state.

I included the test results in the change log to point out an improvement
because of this patch.

I will enrich more the change log as you suggested.

Thanks,
Stratos Karafotis


  reply	other threads:[~2014-04-29 16:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-04-27 22:12 [PATCH] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Change the calculation of next pstate Stratos Karafotis
2014-04-29  4:58 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-04-29 16:34   ` Stratos Karafotis [this message]
2014-04-29 21:52     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-01 18:42       ` Dirk Brandewie

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=535FD4A6.3050905@semaphore.gr \
    --to=stratosk@semaphore.gr \
    --cc=cpufreq@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dirk.j.brandewie@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).