From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Jack Allister <jalliste@amazon.com>
Cc: Paul Durrant <pdurrant@amazon.com>, Jue Wang <juew@amazon.com>,
Usama Arif <usama.arif@bytedance.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] x86: intel_epb: Add earlyparam option to keep bias at performance
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2023 07:26:20 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2e7de96c-0634-4c98-9d56-ceba19c06c98@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231205132355.76306-1-jalliste@amazon.com>
On 12/5/23 05:23, Jack Allister wrote:
> There are certain scenarios where it may be intentional that the EPB was
> set at to 0/ENERGY_PERF_BIAS_PERFORMANCE on kernel boot. For example, in
> data centers a kexec/live-update of the kernel may be performed regularly.
>
> Usually this live-update is time critical and defaulting of the bias back
> to ENERGY_PERF_BIAS_NORMAL may actually be detrimental to the overall
> update time if processors' time to ramp up/boost are affected.
If this makes your kexecs 7 times faster, please say that here.
Could we also please make this less wishy-washy? "May actually be
detrimental" does not scream how critical this is for you.
> This patch introduces a kernel command line "intel_epb_no_override"
> which will leave the EPB at performance if during the restoration code path
> it is detected as such.
No "this patch", please:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/process/maintainer-tip.html
This also needs documentation of the parameter in
Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt.
Let me see if I can write a sane changelog, summarizing the discussion
here for posterity. If there's confusion about a v1 patch that's
cleared up in the discussion, it would be wonderful to capture that in
the v2 changelog as opposed to making minimal changes. How's this? I
think it captures some of the things that Rafael related and also
additional information about the use case that motivated this effort.
--
Buggy BIOSes set a sane boot-time Energy Performance Bias (EPB) that
causes overheating. The kernel overrides any boot-time EPB
"performance" bias to "normal" to avoid this.
<Hardware name here> platforms can tolerate a "performance" bias during
boot without overheating. In addition, because of <root cause(s) here>,
a kexec with a "normal" bias is seven times slower than "performance" to
perform the kexec. Boot time is critical when performing a
kexec/live-update of the kernel which is running guests VMs since boot
time appears as guest latency or downtime.
Introduce a command-line parameter, "intel_epb_no_override", to skip the
"performance"=>"normal" override. This allows folks to get a speedy
kexec without exposing other folks with wonky BIOSes to overheating.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-05 15:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-04 17:28 [PATCH] x86: intel_epb: Add earlyparam option to keep bias at performance Jack Allister
2023-12-04 17:44 ` Dave Hansen
2023-12-05 9:00 ` Durrant, Paul
2023-12-05 12:00 ` David Woodhouse
2023-12-05 12:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-12-05 12:15 ` David Woodhouse
2023-12-05 12:31 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-12-05 12:32 ` David Woodhouse
2023-12-05 12:43 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-12-05 15:19 ` Dave Hansen
2023-12-05 15:27 ` Dave Hansen
2023-12-05 10:23 ` Jack Allister
2023-12-05 12:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-12-05 13:13 ` Jack Allister
2023-12-05 13:23 ` [PATCH v3] " Jack Allister
2023-12-05 15:26 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2023-12-05 13:30 ` [PATCH] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-12-05 15:14 ` [PATCH v4] " Jack Allister
2023-12-05 16:17 ` Dave Hansen
2024-01-02 14:46 ` Jack Allister
2024-01-02 15:09 ` Dave Hansen
2024-01-03 14:46 ` [PATCH v5] " Jack Allister
2024-01-03 15:17 ` Dave Hansen
2024-01-04 9:05 ` [PATCH v6] " Jack Allister
2024-01-04 9:22 ` Durrant, Paul
2024-01-03 15:18 ` [External] [PATCH v5] " Usama Arif
2024-01-04 9:00 ` Jack Allister
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=2e7de96c-0634-4c98-9d56-ceba19c06c98@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jalliste@amazon.com \
--cc=juew@amazon.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pdurrant@amazon.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=usama.arif@bytedance.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.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