[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131219181948.GD32508@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:19:48 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
x86@...nel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
stable@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86 idle: repair large-server 50-watt idle-power
regression
* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 12/19/2013 09:07 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > Likewise, having a barrier before the MONITOR looks sensible as
> > well. Having it _after_ monitor looks weird and is probably wrong.
> > [It might have been the effects of someone seeing the spurious
> > wakeup problems with realizing the true source, or so.]
>
> Does anyone know the history of this barrier after the monitor? I
> know Len is looking for a minimal patchset that can go into -stable,
> and it seems prudent to not preturb the code more than necessary,
> but going forward it would be nice to know...
For the minimal fix I don't think we should change it - but for v3.14
it looks like a speedup for the from-idle codepath, which is
performance sensitive.
( It would also be nice to know whether MONITOR loads that cacheline
into the CPUs cache, and in what state it loads it. )
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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