[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AF5FBC7.9000105@linux.intel.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 16:59:19 -0600
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To: Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>
CC: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <lrodriguez@...eros.com>, davej@...hat.com,
cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mcgrof@...il.com, Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>,
Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
Aeolus Yang <Aeolus.Yang@...eros.com>,
Amod Bodas <Amod.Bodas@...eros.com>,
David Quan <David.Quan@...eros.com>,
Kishore Jotwani <Kishore.Jotwani@...eros.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpu-freq: add troubleshooting section for FSB changes
>> in addition, most FSB systems have the memory controller in the chipset,
>> next to the PCI logic... so that the FSB bus for DMA transactions only
>> carries the snoop traffic, not the whole data.
> So when should people look at this?
at this point the atheros folks haven't even confirmed that this is the cause...
I'm not saying that the linux behavior is optimal with P states (I have a rather
sizeable algorithm rewrite in the queue) but to blame anything and everything on
a half-speed FSB during a very idle system?
I'm still somewhat skeptical. Again.. the CPU is basically idle here (otherwise
ondemand would ramp the freq up quickly); at which point the FSB traffic mostly is
just cache coherency traffic.... much less bandwidth intensive.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists