[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FCD1E57.5070706@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2012 13:45:11 -0700
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
CC: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...allels.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuidle: menu: use nr_running instead of cpuload for
calculating perf mult
On 6/4/2012 1:31 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> And like I said many times now, if you inflate some of the idle periods,
> the work shifts (it doesn't become less) and a next idle period will be
> smaller -- since we'll only become idle again once all work is done.
this is what is not really correct.
you can be idle for many reasons, not just because you have no work
left. most common is waiting for a disk IO. the idle period for that
will not get shorter just because the previous one took more time.
--
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