From: Kajetan Puchalski <kajetan.puchalski@arm.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, lukasz.luba@arm.com,
Dietmar.Eggemann@arm.com, dsmythies@telus.net,
yu.chen.surf@gmail.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/1] cpuidle: teo: Introduce optional util-awareness
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 16:00:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y1vum4BECMf2BXQW@e126311.manchester.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0gvAtpzdQo0Tj13ZGFcop8fdNht7e_Nc_UNYCgbU1zZLA@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 03:12:43PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > The result being that this util-aware TEO variant while using much less
> > C1 and decreasing the percentage of too deep sleeps from ~24% to ~3% in
> > PCMark Web Browsing also uses almost 2% less power. Clearly the power is
> > being wasted on not hitting C1 residency over and over.
>
> Hmm. The PCMark Web Browsing table in your cover letter doesn't indicate that.
>
> The "gmean power usage" there for "teo + util-aware" is 205, whereas
> for "teo" alone it is 187.8. This is still arguably balanced by the
> latency difference (~100 us vs ~185 us, respectively), but this looks
> like trading energy for performance.
In this case yes, I meant 2% less compared to menu but you're right of
course.
[...]
> Definitely it should not be changed if the previous state is a polling
> one which can be checked right away. That would take care of the
> "Intel case" automatically.
Makes sense, I already used the polling flag to implement this in this other
governor I mentioned.
>
> > Should make it much less intense for Intel systems.
>
> So I think that this adjustment only makes sense if the current
> candidate state is state 1 and state 0 is not polling. In the other
> cases the cost of missing an opportunity to save energy would be too
> high for the observed performance gain.
Interesting, but only applying it to C1 and only when C0 isn't polling would
make it effectively not do anything on Intel systems, right? From what I've
seen on Doug's plots even C1 is hardly ever used on his platform, most
sleeps end up in the deepest possible state.
Checking for the polling flag is a good idea regardless so I can send a
v3 with that. If you'd like me to also restrict the entire mechanism to
only working on C1 as you suggested then I'm okay with including that in
the v3 as well. What do you think?
Thanks a lot for all your time & input,
Kajetan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-28 15:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-03 14:49 [RFC PATCH v2 0/1] cpuidle: teo: Introduce optional util-awareness Kajetan Puchalski
2022-10-03 14:49 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/1] " Kajetan Puchalski
2022-10-07 0:06 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/1] " Doug Smythies
2022-10-10 10:09 ` Kajetan Puchalski
2022-10-11 8:21 ` Lukasz Luba
2022-10-12 18:50 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-10-13 11:12 ` Kajetan Puchalski
2022-10-13 22:12 ` Doug Smythies
2022-10-27 19:56 ` Lukasz Luba
2022-10-28 13:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-10-27 20:04 ` Lukasz Luba
2022-10-28 13:37 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-10-28 13:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-10-28 15:00 ` Kajetan Puchalski [this message]
2022-10-28 15:04 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-10-28 15:08 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-10-20 16:20 ` Kajetan Puchalski
2022-10-20 19:52 ` Daniel Lezcano
2022-10-28 7:08 ` Lukasz Luba
2022-10-28 7:11 ` Daniel Lezcano
2022-10-28 7:23 ` Lukasz Luba
2022-10-28 13:25 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-10-28 13:22 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=Y1vum4BECMf2BXQW@e126311.manchester.arm.com \
--to=kajetan.puchalski@arm.com \
--cc=Dietmar.Eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=dsmythies@telus.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukasz.luba@arm.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=yu.chen.surf@gmail.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