lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 15:29:36 +0100 From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org> To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> Cc: Youquan Song <youquan.song@...el.com>, 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 Hi Peter, I'm also using sched_mc level for doing powersaving load balance on ARM platform and we have real benefits. On 9 January 2012 12:12, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote: > On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 19:14 -0500, Youquan Song wrote: >> > Yes it is.. also that knob should die! Like i've been saying for way too >> > long. I'm >< close to committing a patch removing all the power_saving >> > magic from the scheduler. >> Sorry. I do not notice it. > > I hadn't posted it before, but just about every time people post > something related to smt/mc power balancing I say this needs to get > cleaned up. Since telling people doesn't seem to have any effect what so > ever, stronger measures are needed. > >> But currently in many real tests, the knob prove to save power in semi-idle system. >> They are useful in many user scenarios currently. > > I'm not saying the stuff is without merit, I'm just saying that a) the > interface is utter crap and b) nobody seems to spend enough time on it > to 1) understand the load-balancer so that 2) he can integrate the power > saving stuff properly. > > Instead I get one sporadic band-aid after another. > I can also help to on the topic > Also, fundamentally, the split between {smt/mc/numa/book}_power_savings > is completely and fundamentally broken, nobody cares about the actual > topology. We might modify the way we choose between power or performance mode because it's not always a matter of gathering or spreading tasks on cpus but until we found a best interface it's the way to enable powersaving mode > -- > 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/ -- 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