From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, arjan@linux.intel.com,
len.brown@intel.com, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] cpuidle: small improvements & fixes for menu governor (resend)
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 21:26:48 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <563C0FE8.8070301@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1547516.IzrSrfmAQk@vostro.rjw.lan>
On 11/05/2015 05:34 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 03, 2015 05:34:16 PM riel@redhat.com wrote:
>> While working on a paravirt cpuidle driver for KVM guests, I
>> noticed a number of small logic errors in the menu governor
>> code.
>>
>> These patches should get rid of some artifacts that can break
>> the logic in the menu governor under certain corner cases, and
>> make idle state selection work better on CPUs with long C1 exit
>> latencies.
>>
>> I have not seen any adverse effects with them in my (quick)
>> tests. As expected, they do not seem to do much on systems with
>> many power states and very low C1 exit latencies and target residencies.
>
> Thanks!
>
> The patches look good to me.
>
> I might apply [1-2/3] right away, but I'm a bit hesitant about the [3/3] (I'd
> like it to spend some time in linux-next before it goes to Linus). Also, we've
> lived without these changes for quite some time and I don't want to stretch the
> process too much, so I'll queue them up for v4.5 if that's not a problem.
Not a problem at all. I am all for taking these changes carefully,
and seeing what happens.
I did some basic testing with it, but the permutations of what
can happen with cpuidle management are just too many to predict
in advance everything that could happen.
--
All rights reversed
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-06 2:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-03 22:34 [PATCH 0/3] cpuidle: small improvements & fixes for menu governor (resend) riel
2015-11-03 22:34 ` [PATCH 1/3] cpuidle,x86: increase forced cut-off for polling to 20us riel
2015-11-04 16:00 ` Arjan van de Ven
2015-11-03 22:34 ` [PATCH 2/3] cpuidle,menu: use interactivity_req to disable polling riel
2015-11-04 16:01 ` Arjan van de Ven
2016-01-13 17:27 ` Sudeep Holla
2016-01-13 21:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-01-13 22:07 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-01-14 10:40 ` Sudeep Holla
2016-01-15 0:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-01-14 10:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2015-11-03 22:34 ` [PATCH 3/3] cpuidle,menu: smooth out measured_us calculation riel
2015-11-04 16:02 ` Arjan van de Ven
2015-11-05 22:34 ` [PATCH 0/3] cpuidle: small improvements & fixes for menu governor (resend) Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-11-06 2:26 ` Rik van Riel [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=563C0FE8.8070301@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
/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).