[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1326107156.2442.59.camel@twins>
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 12:05:56 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Youquan Song <youquan.song@...el.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de,
hpa@...or.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
suresh.b.siddha@...el.com, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
len.brown@...el.com, anhua.xu@...el.com, chaohong.guo@...el.com,
Youquan Song <youquan.song@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86,sched: Fix sched_smt_power_savings totally broken
On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 19:14 -0500, Youquan Song wrote:
> Fine, I will base your suggestion to develop another patch soon.
>
>
> @@ -3923,6 +3923,10 @@ static inline void update_sg_lb_stats(struct
> sched_domain *sd,
> SCHED_POWER_SCALE);
> if (!sgs->group_capacity)
> sgs->group_capacity = fix_small_capacity(sd, group);
> +
> + if (sched_smt_power_savings)
> + sgs->group_capacity *= 2;
Note, this has the hard-coded assumption you only have 2 threads per
core, which while true for intel, isn't true in general. I think you
meant to write *= group->group_weight or somesuch.
Also, you forgot to limit this to the SD_SHARE_CPUPOWER domain, you're
now doubling the capacity for all domains.
Furthermore, have a look at the SD_PREFER_SIBLING logic and make sure
you're not fighting that.
--
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