linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 0/2] cpufreq: ondemand: Eliminate the deadband effect

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <000001cf9de8$43925230$cab6f690$@net>
Date:	Sat, 12 Jul 2014 08:45:09 -0700
From:	"Doug Smythies" <dsmythies@...us.net>
To:	"'Stratos Karafotis'" <stratosk@...aphore.gr>, <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	<viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:	<linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/2] cpufreq: ondemand: Eliminate the deadband effect


On 2014.07.30 10:00 Stratos Karafotis wrote:

> This patchset changes slightly the calculation of target frequency to
> eliminate the deadband effect (explained in patch 2 changelog) that it
> seems to slow down the CPU in low and medium loads.
>
> Patch 1 introduces a new relation (RELATION_C) for the next frequency
> selection, which chooses the closest frequency to target.
>
> Patch 2 is the actual change to ondemand governor.

> You may find graphs with the 'deadband' effect and benchmark results:
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16kDBh5lyc6YvBnoS1hUa1t2O38z0xrWvaEj5XtJ8auw/edit#gid=2072493052

I did the same benchmark tests before (without) and after (with) this patch set on my i7-2600K system.
I added the results, which are similar to Stratos', under a new "benchmark" tab on the spreadsheet.

... Doug


--
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/