[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3B6D69C3A9EBCA4BA5DA60D91302742904131BED@dlee13.ent.ti.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 10:43:32 -0500
From: "Woodruff, Richard" <r-woodruff2@...com>
To: "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Higer latency with dynamic tick (need for an io-ondemand govenor?)
Hi,
When capturing some traces with dynamic tick we were noticing the
interrupt latency seems to go up a good amount. If you look at the trace
the gpio IRQ is now offset a good amount. Good news I guess is its
pretty predictable.
* If we couple this with progressively higher latency C-States we see
that IO speed can fall by a good amount, especially for PIO mixes. Now
if QOS is maintained you may or may-not care.
I was wondering what thoughts of optimizing this might be.
One thought was if an io-ondemand of some sort was used. It could track
interrupt statistics and be feed back into cpu-idle. When there is a
high interrupt load period it could shrink the acceptable latency and
thus help choose a good a C-State which favors throughput. Some moving
average window could be used to track it.
Perhaps a new interrupt attribute could be attached at irq request time
to allow the tracking of bandwidth important devices.
The attached is captured on a .22 kernel. The same should be available
in a bit on a .24 kernel.
Regards,
Richard W.
Download attachment "idle_trace.PNG" of type "image/png" (58498 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists