From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759613Ab2IKPfw (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Sep 2012 11:35:52 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33490 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757444Ab2IKPft (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Sep 2012 11:35:49 -0400 Message-ID: <504F5A18.8080701@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 11:34:48 -0400 From: Rik van Riel User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120827 Thunderbird/15.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Youquan Song CC: Linux kernel Mailing List , Matthew Garrett , Arjan van de Ven , Boris Ostrovsky , Len Brown , Deepthi Dharwar , ShuoX Liu , youquan.song@intel.com Subject: Re: KS/Plumbers: c-state governor BOF References: <5037B36A.8000209@redhat.com> <20120912024342.GA23544@linux-youquan.bj.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20120912024342.GA23544@linux-youquan.bj.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/11/2012 10:43 PM, Youquan Song wrote: >> After talking about my RFC patches to the c-state governor with >> Matthew and Arjan, it is clear that the whole concept of how >> things are done could use some more discussion. >> >> Since a good number of us will be in San Diego next week, at >> Kernel Summit / Plumbers / etc, I will organize a c-state >> governor BOF for those who are interested. >> >> Things to think about: >> - what should the c-state governor do? >> - how to best predict the future? >> - what kinds of odd workloads do we need to accomodate? > > Hi Rik, > > Just notice there is a topic to discuss menu governor at Kernel Summit. > Acutally, I have posted a patchset to at May 11 2012 to bring up the > topic, at that time, I only have a convinced and proved application > turbostat v1 to prove that my patch are useful. I try to find other > workloads to prove that the patchset are also solidated useful. But I > stucked in other high priority tasks, so I move slow on it. > From you bring up the issue I guess that you already has real workload > to show this issue. > My patchset is not only improve repeat mode failure but also improve > general prediction failure. Let's have a discuss and talk about it. > > Here is the patchset posted at May 11 2012. > > http://lwn.net/Articles/496919/ "x86,idle: Enhance cpuidle prediction to > handle its failure" > http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1205.1/02267.html > "[PATCH 1/3] x86,idle: Quickly notice prediction failure for repeat mode" > http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1205.1/02268.html > "[PATCH 2/3] x86,idle: Quickly notice prediction failure in general case" > http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1205.1/02269.html > "[PATCH 3/3] x86,idle: Set residency to 0 if target Cstate not really > enter" Your patches could make a lot of sense when integrated with my patches: http://people.redhat.com/riel/cstate/ However, we should probably get the tracepoint upstream first, so we can know for sure :) -- All rights reversed