From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Doug Smythies" Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/2] cpufreq: ondemand: Eliminate the deadband effect Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 08:45:09 -0700 Message-ID: <000001cf9de8$43925230$cab6f690$@net> References: <1404147574-17422-1-git-send-email-stratosk@semaphore.gr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from cmta2.telus.net ([209.171.16.75]:56523 "EHLO cmta2.telus.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751473AbaGLPpL (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Jul 2014 11:45:11 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1404147574-17422-1-git-send-email-stratosk@semaphore.gr> Content-Language: en-ca Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: 'Stratos Karafotis' , rjw@rjwysocki.net, viresh.kumar@linaro.org Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2014.07.30 10:00 Stratos Karafotis wrote: > This patchset changes slightly the calculation of target frequency to > eliminate the deadband effect (explained in patch 2 changelog) that it > seems to slow down the CPU in low and medium loads. > > Patch 1 introduces a new relation (RELATION_C) for the next frequency > selection, which chooses the closest frequency to target. > > Patch 2 is the actual change to ondemand governor. > You may find graphs with the 'deadband' effect and benchmark results: > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16kDBh5lyc6YvBnoS1hUa1t2O38z0xrWvaEj5XtJ8auw/edit#gid=2072493052 I did the same benchmark tests before (without) and after (with) this patch set on my i7-2600K system. I added the results, which are similar to Stratos', under a new "benchmark" tab on the spreadsheet. ... Doug