From: Huang Rui <ray.huang@amd.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>, "Li, Tony" <Tony.Li@amd.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: Mwait usage on AMD processors
Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 15:25:53 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150519072552.GA28547@hr-slim.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150514142051.GD29125@pd.tnic>
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 10:20:51PM +0800, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 09:38:57PM +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
> > Is C1E here you mentioned is waiting state that use mwaitx enters at
> > AMD platform? If yes, please see below comments:
> >
> > Current processor:
> > Power saving: C0 < C1E (AMD) < C1
>
> How is C1 > C1E ?
>
> C1E is the Enhanced C1.
>
Apology that cause to misunderstand. It's not as same as intel.
Intel is able to go to C1E like you said, the C1E has less power
consumption than C1 on Intel platform.
But on AMD platform, mwaitx/mwait cannot go to C1 or C1E
like intel. The power consumption of waiting phase is somewhere in
between (C0 and C1). Actually, it's still in C0 but less power
consumption than normal C0.
> > Performance: Halt < Mwait <= Mwaitx
>
> What performance? You're idle.
>
The faster waiting exit speed. But it's hard to test the improvement,
do you have any idea? It's told by HW designer.
> > Halt -> C1, and Mwaitx/Mwait -> C1E (AMD)
>
> Huh? Right now we do HLT on all AMD and the hw enters C1E after a bunch
> of stuff is fulfilled first. Are the plans to enter C1E from MWAIT now?
>
Yes, I see all AMD platform only use HLT at current.
> > Consider about the balance between power consumption and performance,
> > so we want to expose the interface. And mwaitx has different opcode
> > with traditional mwait.
>
> There's alternative()'s for that.
>
> > Due to C1E (AMD) less power saving that real C1, so you can think it
> > still in C0 at current.
>
> Which CPUs, current or upcoming?
>
Current CPU, power consumption cannot go to deeper low power state
(C1) via mwaitx/mwait. But HW designers will implement it in future
processors.
Thanks,
Rui
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-19 7:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-14 6:54 Mwait usage on AMD processors Huang Rui
2015-05-14 9:21 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-05-14 10:17 ` Huang Rui
2015-05-14 11:23 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-05-14 13:38 ` Huang Rui
2015-05-14 14:20 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-05-19 7:25 ` Huang Rui [this message]
2015-05-19 8:50 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-05-19 9:42 ` Huang Rui
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=20150519072552.GA28547@hr-slim.amd.com \
--to=ray.huang@amd.com \
--cc=Tony.Li@amd.com \
--cc=aaron.lu@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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