From: Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@amd.com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Arjan van de Veen <arjan@infradead.org>,
"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/6] AMD C1E aware idle support
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 15:21:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080806132139.GA6713@alberich.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080805174217.GC8380@ucw.cz>
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 07:42:18PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > AMD CPUs with C1E support are currently excluded from high resolution
> > > > timers and NOHZ support. The reason is that C1E is a BIOS controlled
> > > > C3 power state which switches off TSC and the local APIC timer. The
> > > > ACPI C-State control manages the TSC/local APIC timer wreckage, but
> > > > this does not include the C1 based ("halt" instruction) C1E mode. The
> > > > BIOS/SMM controlled C1E state works on most systems even without
> > > > enabling ACPI C-State control.
> > >
> > > What a mess.
>
> Yep, seems like AMD is breaking C1 semantics. Is it even valid from
> ACPI spec point of view?
>
> > > What is the measured power savings that justifies this effort?
> >
> > IMHO the power savings are not that important when such a kernel runs
> > on bare metal:
>
> Ok, so maybe we should disable C1E to work around its misdesign?
Disabling C1E is not an option. It saves the most power when you have
a multicore AMD CPU. Neither C2 nor C3 are declared here. AMD C1E is
hardware level power management if all cores are in the C1 state.
If you disable C1E and use a NOHZ kernel your power consumption is
higher than using C1E with a periodic timer (say 250 HZ).
> It would be certainly nice to have noc1e command line option...
The sane way to disable it is in the BIOS -- if your BIOS provides
such an option.
Thomas pointed already out that C1E might be enabled later during
boot. So you would have to reset the respective bits whenever you
enter idle. This is ugly and what would be the benefit of this?
Andreas
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-06 13:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-12 10:28 [patch 0/6] AMD C1E aware idle support Thomas Gleixner
2008-06-12 10:28 ` [patch 1/6] x86: simplify idle selection Thomas Gleixner
2008-06-12 10:28 ` [patch 2/6] x86: cleanup C1E enabled detection Thomas Gleixner
2008-06-12 10:28 ` [patch 3/6] x86: use cpuinfo to check for interrupt pending message msr Thomas Gleixner
2008-06-13 6:55 ` Andreas Herrmann
2008-06-13 12:38 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-06-13 14:28 ` Andreas Herrmann
2008-06-12 10:28 ` [patch 4/6] x86: use cpuid to check MWAIT support for C1 Thomas Gleixner
2008-06-12 10:28 ` [patch 5/6] x86: move more common idle functions/variables to process.c Thomas Gleixner
2008-06-12 10:29 ` [patch 6/6] x86: add c1e aware idle function Thomas Gleixner
2008-06-13 0:55 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-13 6:02 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-06-13 7:28 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-18 19:21 ` Pavel Machek
2008-06-18 20:26 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-06-18 21:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-06-18 22:04 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-06-18 22:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-06-18 22:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-06-12 12:31 ` [patch 0/6] AMD C1E aware idle support Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-06-12 12:32 ` Ingo Molnar
[not found] ` <200806131118.31160.rjw@sisk.pl>
2008-06-13 11:52 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-06-12 13:09 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-06-12 14:24 ` Andreas Herrmann
2008-06-12 15:48 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-06-14 21:27 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2008-06-18 22:47 ` Len Brown
2008-07-04 14:35 ` Andreas Herrmann
2008-07-04 15:18 ` [PATCH] x86: emphasize that c1e aware idle stuff is AMD specific Andreas Herrmann
2008-08-05 17:42 ` [patch 0/6] AMD C1E aware idle support Pavel Machek
2008-08-06 13:21 ` Andreas Herrmann [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=20080806132139.GA6713@alberich.amd.com \
--to=andreas.herrmann3@amd.com \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=macro@linux-mips.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=pavel@suse.cz \
--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