From: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] sched/core: split iowait state into two states
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 11:08:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f82fdfa3-8743-4d42-82d4-a4ca9bc24e15@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240424100127.GV40213@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 24/04/2024 11:01, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 06:11:21AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> iowait is a bogus metric, but it's helpful in the sense that it allows
>> short waits to not enter sleep states that have a higher exit latency
>> than would've otherwise have been picked for iowait'ing tasks. However,
>> it's harmless in that lots of applications and monitoring assumes that
>> iowait is busy time, or otherwise use it as a health metric.
>> Particularly for async IO it's entirely nonsensical.
>
> Let me get this straight, all of this is about working around
> cpuidle menu governor insaity?
>
> Rafael, how far along are we with fully deprecating that thing? Yes it
> still exists, but should people really be using it still?
>
Well there is also the iowait boost handling in schedutil and intel_pstate
which, at least in synthetic benchmarks, does have an effect [1].
io_uring (the only user of iowait but not iowait_acct) works around both.
See commit ("8a796565cec3 io_uring: Use io_schedule* in cqring wait")
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240304201625.100619-1-christian.loehle@arm.com/#t
Kind Regards,
Christian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-24 10:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20240416121526.67022-1-axboe@kernel.dk>
[not found] ` <20240416121526.67022-5-axboe@kernel.dk>
2024-04-24 10:01 ` [PATCH 4/4] sched/core: split iowait state into two states Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-24 10:08 ` Christian Loehle [this message]
2024-04-25 10:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-25 10:39 ` Christian Loehle
2024-04-25 14:20 ` 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=f82fdfa3-8743-4d42-82d4-a4ca9bc24e15@arm.com \
--to=christian.loehle@arm.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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