From: Philip Langdale <philipl@overt.org>
To: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Cc: Jeff Garrett <jeff@jgarrett.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: acpi_idle: Very idle Core i7 machine never enters C3
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 08:41:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100427084134.2874d142@fido5> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1004270319560.3999@localhost.localdomain>
On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 03:26:34 -0400 (EDT)
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> wrote:
>
>
> Curious failure.
> I could imagine that there is something in the design of this board
> where we want to not enter a deep C-state, and thus the board and
> Linux are doing the right thing by avoiding the C-state.
> However, ignoring the bm-status check and blindly going to that state
> I would expect to impact throughput and latency, but don't see
> how that might 'serialize' the workload or otherwise cause it
> to use some cores and not others.
Hmm - and now I can't reproduce it. I got proper parallelization across
the kernel compile. I guess some sort of runtime state was messed up,
and I obviously lost that then I rebooted. :-/
> It is possible that we jump into those deep states just to be
> immediately forced to jump right back out. You'd see this in
> high usage counts under /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpuidle
>
> turbostat, of course, would tell you the actual residency in those
> states. Of course there is a twist... The hardware has a feature to
> recognize thrashing and may demote an OS request for a deep state into
> an actual hardware request for a shallower state. this is one reason
> that the output of powertop (request) and turbostat (result)
> may be different.
Without the patch, Turbostat showed C3 residency of 99% for most
hyper-threads with one or two getting ~15% C6 residency. PC3 was 75%.
Cores were at their lowest P state.
With the patch, C6 residency is 99%, PC6 is 75% and 7 hyper-threads at
lowest P state with one stubborning running at a higher level.
I have a very similarly configured machine with an asus motherboard and
it doesn't have this problem - which is another reason I'm wondering if
it's an OEM screwup.
--phil
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-27 15:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-26 8:47 acpi_idle: Very idle Core i7 machine never enters C3 Jeff Garrett
2010-01-26 12:41 ` peng huang
2010-01-26 14:59 ` Jeff Garrett
2010-01-27 13:27 ` peng huang
2010-02-05 16:22 ` Jeff Garrett
2010-01-26 21:45 ` Andi Kleen
2010-02-05 16:09 ` Jeff Garrett
2010-02-05 17:45 ` Len Brown
2010-02-05 20:53 ` Jeff Garrett
2010-04-27 2:40 ` Philip Langdale
2010-04-27 7:26 ` Len Brown
2010-04-27 15:41 ` Philip Langdale [this message]
2010-04-27 12:47 ` Jeff Garrett
2010-04-30 14:57 ` Philip Langdale
2010-04-30 16:25 ` Len Brown
2010-04-30 17:44 ` Matthew Garrett
2010-04-30 18:35 ` Philip Langdale
2010-05-25 5:43 ` Len Brown
2010-05-25 5:59 ` Yu, Luming
2010-05-25 12:39 ` Matthew Garrett
2010-05-25 12:43 ` Matthew Garrett
2010-05-25 15:33 ` Len Brown
2010-05-25 18:55 ` Matthew Garrett
2010-07-21 21:31 ` [PATCH] ACPI: make acpi_idle Nehalem-aware Len Brown
2010-07-22 0:53 ` Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-07-22 7:47 ` Andi Kleen
2010-07-22 15:57 ` Len Brown
2010-07-22 21:21 ` [PATCH] ACPI: skip checking BM_STS if the BIOS doesn't ask for it Len Brown
2010-07-22 21:40 ` [PATCH] ACPI: create "processor.bm_check_disable" boot param Len Brown
2010-07-26 7:24 ` Andi Kleen
2010-07-27 0:19 ` Len Brown
2010-07-27 11:28 ` Andi Kleen
2010-07-28 18:58 ` Len Brown
2010-07-22 21:25 ` [PATCH] ACPI: make acpi_idle Nehalem-aware Iain
2010-07-22 21:53 ` Iain
2010-07-22 22:01 ` Len Brown
2010-07-23 12:40 ` Iain
2010-08-03 6:55 ` Pavel Machek
2010-08-03 7:05 ` Andi Kleen
2010-05-25 12:37 ` acpi_idle: Very idle Core i7 machine never enters C3 Matthew Garrett
2010-05-25 15:40 ` Len Brown
2010-07-22 5:34 ` Len Brown
2010-02-01 14:10 ` Pavel Machek
2010-02-05 16:30 ` Jeff Garrett
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=20100427084134.2874d142@fido5 \
--to=philipl@overt.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=jeff@jgarrett.org \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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).