From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
To: melwyn lobo <linux.melwyn@gmail.com>
Cc: "Chalhoub, Nicole" <n-chalhoub@ti.com>,
Deepthi Dharwar <deepthi@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] CPUIdle: Reevaluate C-states under CPU load to favor deeper C-states
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 10:49:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <878viv17t2.fsf@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHSGOuuexpCDNoP1G1Gyge2DCep0rsPmUwrVyZFDQ1_tH+Du7Q@mail.gmail.com> (melwyn lobo's message of "Tue, 20 Mar 2012 20:19:02 +0530")
melwyn lobo <linux.melwyn@gmail.com> writes:
> Hey Kevin,
> I would like to try out this patch in my platform see the benefits
> that you are reporting. But there is one issue in this patch. You have
> not initialized "hrtimer_timeout" variable.
> This will always be 0 right ?.
Correct.
The generic code defaults to zero so that the default behavior with this
patch is unchanged from previous behavior. In order to use this
feature, your platform-specific code which creates your C-states sets
the per-C-state timer values.
Kevin
> Thanks,
> -M
>
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 11:36 PM, Chalhoub, Nicole <n-chalhoub@ti.com> wrote:
>> Hi Deepthi,
>>
>>>
>> Texas Instruments France SA, 821 Avenue Jack Kilby, 06270 Villeneuve Loubet. 036 420 040 R.C.S Antibes. Capital de EUR 753.920
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Deepthi Dharwar [mailto:deepthi@linux.vnet.ibm.com]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 12:13 PM
>>> To: Hilman, Kevin
>>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Arjan van de Ven; linux-arm-
>>> kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux-omap@vger.kernel.org; linux-
>>> pm@lists.linux-foundation.org; Chalhoub, Nicole
>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] CPUIdle: Reevaluate C-states under CPU load to favor
>>> deeper C-states
>>
>> [...]
>>> By setting timers when we enter non-deepest C-state possible, such that
>>> when it fires we
>>> can re-evaluate and try moving into deeper and deeper C-states enhancing
>>> the
>>> power savings is a good feature to have.
>>>
>>> Looking at the current implementation, is it possible to have it as
>>> configurable option
>>> where one can enable/disable this functionality through the backhand
>>> driver ?
>>
>> The timeout values of the c state timers are set in the backhand driver.
>> By setting the timeout to 0 the timers will not fire so you'll not have this functionality enabled
>>
>>> Also I am thinking, instead of having them in governor
>>> wouldnt it be a good idea to have it implemented in
>>> the backhand driver itself ?
>>> --Deepthi
>>
>>
>> In fact each C-state had its own configurable timer, so it is a parameter characterizing a C-state as it is for the exit_latency and target_residency parameters.
>> And we wanted the timer to fire only when we do not go in deep Cstate due to a high load. This decision is made in the CPU idle governor. So the functionality should be seen from the governor..
>>
>> Thanks and Regards
>> Nicole
>>
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-20 17:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-19 23:35 [PATCH] CPUIdle: Reevaluate C-states under CPU load to favor deeper C-states Kevin Hilman
2011-10-19 13:11 ` Kevin Hilman
2011-11-04 21:46 ` Kevin Hilman
2011-11-09 11:13 ` Deepthi Dharwar
2011-11-09 18:06 ` Chalhoub, Nicole
2012-03-20 14:49 ` melwyn lobo
2012-03-20 17:49 ` Kevin Hilman [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=878viv17t2.fsf@ti.com \
--to=khilman@ti.com \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=deepthi@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux.melwyn@gmail.com \
--cc=n-chalhoub@ti.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox