From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, rafael@kernel.org,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
nicolas.pitre@linaro.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] sched: idle: IRQ based next prediction for idle period
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:17:27 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1601131017000.3575@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56952414.2000800@linaro.org>
On Tue, 12 Jan 2016, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 01/12/2016 04:12 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > This looks really wrong. Why on earth don't you implement a proper governor
> > and just get rid of this extra hackery?
>
> That is part of the ongoing work where we are integrating the different PM
> subsystems with the scheduler in order have them collaborating together as
> asked by Ingo [1].
>
> The idea is to get rid of the governors and let the scheduler to tell the
> Cpuidle framework : "I expect to sleep <x> nsec and I have a <y>
> nsec latency requirement" as stated by Peter Zijlstra [2].
>
> The code above could be not nice but I think it begins to do what is expecting
> Peter. It is an embryonic code and in order to prevent too much different
> topics for a single series, I posted the two first patches which provide the
> next event API as the foundations for the next changes. How we integrate the
> 'next event' is a question I wanted to postpone in a different series of RFC
> patches.
Fair enough.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-13 9:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-06 15:22 [RFC PATCH 0/2] IRQ based next prediction Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-06 15:22 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] irq: Add a framework to measure interrupt timings Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-08 15:31 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-12 11:42 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-06 15:22 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] sched: idle: IRQ based next prediction for idle period Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-06 17:40 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-07 15:42 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-12 19:27 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-10 22:37 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-10 22:46 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-10 22:58 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-10 23:13 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-08 15:43 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-12 12:41 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-12 13:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-12 14:16 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-12 14:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-12 14:52 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-12 15:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-12 16:04 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-13 9:17 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2016-01-18 13:21 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 15:41 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-20 16:00 ` [RFC V2 0/2] IRQ based next prediction Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 16:00 ` [RFC V2 1/2] irq: Add a framework to measure interrupt timings Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 17:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-21 9:25 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-21 10:27 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-20 19:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 19:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-20 20:04 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-20 20:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 20:22 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-21 9:50 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-21 10:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-21 12:38 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-21 20:27 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-21 13:52 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-21 14:19 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-21 18:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-22 10:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-21 9:26 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 19:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-21 9:53 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 16:00 ` [RFC V2 2/2] sched: idle: IRQ based next prediction for idle period Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 17:46 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-20 18:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-21 10:03 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 19:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 19:17 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-20 19:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 19:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 19:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 19:57 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-20 20:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 19:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-21 13:54 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-21 14:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-20 16:00 ` [RFC V2 0/2] IRQ based next prediction Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 16:00 ` [RFC V2 1/2] irq: Add a framework to measure interrupt timings Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 16:00 ` [RFC V2 2/2] sched: idle: IRQ based next prediction for idle period Daniel Lezcano
2016-01-20 20:14 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-01-21 13:04 ` Daniel Lezcano
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=alpine.DEB.2.11.1601131017000.3575@nanos \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.pitre@linaro.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/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