From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97D02238D56; Fri, 7 Feb 2025 14:48:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.20 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738939723; cv=none; b=ttp7uhJoGH+shfo3HxXqddmU9rGpcZtvHfz5mA1Y/Wzq1UbSGhm1nzPIesiAKf7319kPX/iy5V0CKZRIN44CmKQ8t92dPoZ2GkJBo6jbQ51omv3WL5k6VZckJ8+Cqg/fpOzB0uTbknBgDnbut1s8pHBad2GeVx2hhZLINWhfDxQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738939723; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5XIlGZsiLQw2hQ6a1oSKBh7M9NzM4ngrTEXTXgaUFr0=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=mINKGWPh/VZPcg6QE0qHBdn/WagQNh3u5hH3O2qbCQsI8TJcwXMbwI/z6SpTvIxDbpQNm/RSuILYOKDRLvJY6TmqwrCWkHzPkYX8nNTY14k2Egdiuh97Tx2FOUzHYwKyeYzpR8lo6z8PEeE9EdW3EewXHOhSNpEKE4IQTh+pu8M= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=UaI62Dec; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.20 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="UaI62Dec" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1738939722; x=1770475722; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to: references:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=5XIlGZsiLQw2hQ6a1oSKBh7M9NzM4ngrTEXTXgaUFr0=; b=UaI62DecYncQ9pUWSqS9fWd9WXQjMj4yax8lx1MBOzLkp8RMG7MKOt5O 2pQG2HQX0UAus4xBpzX3/Mb4B+HKYx2VcPiA3GcubXQVHHfTglrpQmZnx zWQfRzPaekFRSfN595rb9P+un5vlm/1bxy5b6MEcryiZ/o/vhkyL0no3n guffdbB8E7r9x8Qawvu2mfB0ojKMrK4lj8YcF+HCSfrFTP/W3M9aOSjow DArOSjFBvoqp9OcyhT4odd6iFXsruncMMklkpV1UPq//NBflV56rCXYSJ ENMvz+si3OwPGj2J7UrKDoB8anD0zFEhlFvJXQK0M3f4HCAY6MJUsUNkl Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: WgKSAi6CRwW5Cn822uCI4w== X-CSE-MsgGUID: CtYN7sAPQmyfHitXNazW7w== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11338"; a="39274297" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.13,267,1732608000"; d="scan'208";a="39274297" Received: from fmviesa001.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.141]) by orvoesa112.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Feb 2025 06:48:41 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 7Z+7UNi+QQe9rL9NzE4/cg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: DflmxkABT/WG7ezG8AN8Ww== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.12,224,1728975600"; d="scan'208";a="142415230" Received: from linux.intel.com ([10.54.29.200]) by fmviesa001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Feb 2025 06:48:41 -0800 Received: from abityuts-desk1.ger.corp.intel.com (abityuts-desk1.fi.intel.com [10.237.68.150]) by linux.intel.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB49D20B5713; Fri, 7 Feb 2025 06:48:38 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4917ca35e5e0c7035f09c02d5080a69ed3e88c44.camel@linux.intel.com> Subject: Re: [RFT][PATCH v1 0/5] cpuidle: menu: Avoid discarding useful information when processing recent idle intervals From: Artem Bityutskiy To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux PM Cc: LKML , Daniel Lezcano , Christian Loehle , Aboorva Devarajan Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2025 16:48:37 +0200 In-Reply-To: <1916668.tdWV9SEqCh@rjwysocki.net> References: <1916668.tdWV9SEqCh@rjwysocki.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.52.4 (3.52.4-2.fc40) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Hi, thanks for the patches! On Thu, 2025-02-06 at 15:21 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Hi Everyone, >=20 > This work had been triggered by a report that commit 0611a640e60a ("event= poll: > prefer kfree_rcu() in __ep_remove()") had caused the critical-jOPS metric= of > the SPECjbb 2015 benchmark [1] to drop by around 50% even though it gener= ally > reduced kernel overhead.=C2=A0 Indeed, it was found during further invest= igation > that the total interrupt rate while running the SPECjbb workload had fall= en as > a result of that commit by 55% and the local timer interrupt rate had fal= len > by > almost 80%. I ran SPECjbb2015 with and it doubles critical-jOPS and basically makes it "normal" again. Thanks! Reported-by: Artem Bityutskiy Tested-by: Artem Bityutskiy