From: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] cpuidle: mvebu: update cpuidle thresholds for Armada XP SOCs
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 11:33:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5502BCEA.7000209@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150310190507.64b3c153@free-electrons.com>
On 03/10/2015 07:05 PM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Hello Daniel,
>
> I know you suggested a more rigorous method of determining the exit
> latency and target residency times, but would it be nonetheless
> possible to apply this patch, which clearly improves performance a lot,
> and actually makes the code match the values used in the vendor kernel?
>
> I also think this patch should be marked for stable, it fixes values
> introduced in commit b858fbc1919720f7f54360098ece03b383e961fa, and
> should therefore be backported all the way to v3.16.
I applied the patch for v4.1.
I will let you send later an mail to stable@ with the commit-id to ask
backport. I don't want to put a stable@ tag in the patch as it does not
enter in the stable kernel rules.
Thanks
-- Daniel
> On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 15:55:03 +0100 (CET), s. rannou wrote:
>> Originally, the thresholds used in the cpuidle driver for Armada SOCs
>> were temporarily chosen, leaving room for improvements.
>>
>> This commit updates the thresholds for the Armada XP SOCs with values
>> that positively impact performances:
>>
>> without patch with patch vendor kernel
>> - iperf localhost (gbit/sec) ~3.7 ~6.4 ~5.4
>> - ioping tmpfs (iops) ~163k ~206k ~179k
>> - ioping tmpfs (mib/s) ~636 ~805 ~699
>>
>> The idle power consumption is negatively impacted (proportionally less
>> than the performance gain), and we are still performing better than
>> the vendor kernel here:
>>
>> without patch with patch vendor kernel
>> - power consumption idle (W) ~2.4 ~3.2 ~4.4
>> - power consumption busy (W) ~8.6 ~8.3 ~8.6
>>
>> There is still room for improvement regarding the value of these
>> thresholds, they were chosen to mimic the vendor kernel.
>>
>> This patch only impacts Armada XP SOCs and was tested on Online Labs
>> C1 boards. A similar approach can be taken to improve the performances
>> of the Armada 370 and Armada 38x SOCs.
>>
>> Thanks a lot to Thomas Petazzoni, Gregory Clement and Willy Tarreau
>> for the discussions and tips around this topic.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sebastien Rannou <mxs@sbrk.org>
>> ---
>> drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-mvebu-v7.c | 8 ++++----
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-mvebu-v7.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-mvebu-v7.c
>> index 38e6861..3716a1f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-mvebu-v7.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-mvebu-v7.c
>> @@ -50,17 +50,17 @@ static struct cpuidle_driver armadaxp_idle_driver = {
>> .states[0] = ARM_CPUIDLE_WFI_STATE,
>> .states[1] = {
>> .enter = mvebu_v7_enter_idle,
>> - .exit_latency = 10,
>> + .exit_latency = 100,
>> .power_usage = 50,
>> - .target_residency = 100,
>> + .target_residency = 1000,
>> .name = "MV CPU IDLE",
>> .desc = "CPU power down",
>> },
>> .states[2] = {
>> .enter = mvebu_v7_enter_idle,
>> - .exit_latency = 100,
>> + .exit_latency = 1000,
>> .power_usage = 5,
>> - .target_residency = 1000,
>> + .target_residency = 10000,
>> .flags = MVEBU_V7_FLAG_DEEP_IDLE,
>> .name = "MV CPU DEEP IDLE",
>> .desc = "CPU and L2 Fabric power down",
>
>
>
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-13 10:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-13 14:55 [PATCH] cpuidle: mvebu: update cpuidle thresholds for Armada XP SOCs s. rannou
2015-02-24 17:36 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2015-02-25 10:01 ` Daniel Lezcano
2015-02-25 15:56 ` Sebastien Rannou
2015-02-26 9:06 ` Daniel Lezcano
2015-03-10 18:05 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2015-03-10 18:35 ` Daniel Lezcano
2015-03-10 18:42 ` Andrew Lunn
2015-03-10 18:47 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2015-03-10 18:52 ` Daniel Lezcano
2015-03-13 10:33 ` Daniel Lezcano [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=5502BCEA.7000209@linaro.org \
--to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.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 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).