linux-rt-users.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@linaro.org>,
	davem@davemloft.net, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Robin Randhawa <robin.randhawa@arm.com>,
	Charles Garcia-Tobin <charles.garcia-tobin@arm.com>,
	Steve Bannister <Steve.Bannister@arm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Arvind Chauhan <arvind.chauhan@arm.com>,
	Patch Tracking <patches@linaro.org>,
	airlied@redhat.com, mingo@redhat.com,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com>,
	Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 1/5] workqueues: Introduce new flag WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT for power oriented workqueues
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 12:11:18 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130426191118.GD1433@mtj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKohpo=U5OqN7SM7XyOWv-WoUHOoJvGc6wcGH61+uikPK3novg@mail.gmail.com>

Hey, Viresh.

It's already too late for the upcoming merge window, but things
generally look good to me and I'll apply the patchset once wq/for-3.11
opens.  One nitpick tho.

On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 09:13:44AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> +	workqueue.power_efficient
> +			Workqueues can be performance or power-oriented.
> +			Currently, most workqueues are bound to the CPU they
                                   ^^^^
                                   per-cpu would be better

> +			were created on. This gives good performance (due to
> +			cache effects) at the cost of potentially waking up
> +			otherwise idle cores just to process some work. To save
> +			power, we can allow the work to be rescheduled on a core
> +			that is already awake.

The above description is confusing to me.  As have been discussed
multiple times before, per-cpu workqueue in itself doesn't wake up the
CPU physically.  The timer may but per-cpu workqueue doesn't.  It was
confusing when this patchset was first posted and the above phrasing
is still confusing.  What the patchset tries to do is preventing the
scheduler from perceiving the CPU as active due to the activated
worker thread pinned to that CPU, right?  The knob doesn't really do
anything about waking up the processor in itself.  It just avoids
feeding the scheduler with noisy activation events and allows it to
allocate work item execution according to the scheduler's view of CPU
active/idleness.  As the scheduler has longer / larger scope of
overall CPU activities and means to regulate them, this leads to more
power-efficient allocation of work item executions, right?  It'd be
really great if the descriptions and the comment above the flag makes
this abundantly clear because it's not something too apparent.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-04-26 19:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-04-24 11:42 [PATCH V5 0/5] Queue work on power efficient wq Viresh Kumar
2013-04-24 11:42 ` [PATCH V5 1/5] workqueues: Introduce new flag WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT for power oriented workqueues Viresh Kumar
2013-04-24 12:20   ` Amit Kucheria
2013-04-24 12:27     ` Viresh Kumar
2013-04-24 16:12       ` Tejun Heo
     [not found]         ` <CAP245DUGuaSQbP4026N8kgn6-NqXFJWR3zKoYud=HQ_b+v5+Xw@mail.gmail.com>
2013-04-25  3:43           ` Viresh Kumar
2013-04-25 11:13             ` Amit Kucheria
2013-04-25 11:15               ` Viresh Kumar
2013-04-26 19:11             ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2013-04-29  6:36               ` Viresh Kumar
2013-04-29 16:19                 ` Tejun Heo
2013-04-29 16:42                   ` Viresh Kumar
2013-05-13  8:29               ` Viresh Kumar
2013-05-14 17:55                 ` Tejun Heo
2013-04-24 11:42 ` [PATCH V5 2/5] workqueue: Add system wide power_efficient workqueues Viresh Kumar
2013-05-14 17:56   ` Tejun Heo
2013-04-24 11:42 ` [PATCH V5 3/5] PHYLIB: queue work on system_power_efficient_wq Viresh Kumar
2013-04-24 11:42 ` [PATCH V5 4/5] block: queue work on power efficient wq Viresh Kumar
2013-05-14 17:57   ` Tejun Heo
2013-04-24 11:42 ` [PATCH V5 5/5] fbcon: " Viresh Kumar
2013-05-14 17:57   ` Tejun Heo
2013-05-14 17:54 ` [PATCH V5 0/5] Queue " Tejun Heo
2013-05-15  5:48   ` Viresh Kumar
2013-07-08 15:37 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2013-07-08 15:47   ` Viresh Kumar
2013-07-08 15:57     ` Uwe Kleine-König
2013-07-08 16:48       ` Viresh Kumar
2013-07-08 18:55         ` Uwe Kleine-König

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=20130426191118.GD1433@mtj.dyndns.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=Liviu.Dudau@arm.com \
    --cc=Steve.Bannister@arm.com \
    --cc=airlied@redhat.com \
    --cc=amit.kucheria@linaro.org \
    --cc=arvind.chauhan@arm.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=charles.garcia-tobin@arm.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=patches@linaro.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=robin.randhawa@arm.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).