From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@googlemail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, len.brown@intel.com, mingo@elte.hu,
akpm@osdl.org, jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org, dwalker@mvista.com,
nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, rpm@xenomai.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] maximum latency tracking infrastructure (version 2)
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 15:48:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <44EEFFC8.40202@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <58d0dbf10608250643v1bb19d0ci99ae30243125a962@mail.gmail.com>
Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> The patch below adds infrastructure to track "maximum allowable
>> latency" for
>> power saving policies.
>
> Very interesting approach. I wonder if it could be used to cover
> another problematic source of latencies as well: asynchronous SMIs.
> They quickly cause delays reaching from a few 100 us up to
> milliseconds.
>
> Hard-RT extension like Xenomai work around this on several Intel
> chipsets by disabling SMI unconditionally
I would consider that a mistake. SMI's are used to do things like emergency thermal protections etc etc.
Disabling them unconditionally is going to risk you your hardware.
> I guess an interface to let also applications / the sysadmin specifiy
> a latency constraint would be useful as well. sysfs?
I thought about this a lot but decided against. There are already ways to do things like disable specific C states etc,
and if we expose this it'll mostly get abused by certain desktop applications who have no idea what they are doing ;=(
What makes anyone think that userspace could make a better decision than the drivers?
Video / Audio playback are not good examples since these both already would work automatically correct with only in-kernel
infrastructure. Hard-RT systems are also not a good example since those should use the existing boot parameters. I couldn't
come up with other scenarios, and until we have a good one I'm against exposing crap to sysfs "just because we can".
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-08-25 13:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-08-25 11:22 [RFC] maximum latency tracking infrastructure (version 2) Arjan van de Ven
2006-08-25 13:30 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2006-08-25 13:34 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-08-25 13:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-08-25 13:43 ` Jan Kiszka
2006-08-25 13:48 ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2006-08-25 14:18 ` Jan Kiszka
2006-08-25 15:15 ` Jesse Barnes
2006-08-25 15:43 ` Daniel Walker
2006-08-25 19:26 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-08-25 19:35 ` Daniel Walker
2006-08-25 22:14 ` Andrew Morton
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=44EEFFC8.40202@linux.intel.com \
--to=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=dwalker@mvista.com \
--cc=jan.kiszka@googlemail.com \
--cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=rpm@xenomai.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