[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <563B6642.2090803@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 06:22:58 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@...el.com>,
Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] sched: introduce synchronized idle injection
On 11/5/2015 2:09 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I can see such a scheme having a fairly big impact on latency, esp. with
> forced idleness such as this. That's not going to be popular for many
> workloads.
idle injection is a last ditch effort in thermal management, before
this gets used the hardware already has clamped you to a low frequency,
reduced memory speeds, probably dimmed your screen etc etc.
at this point there are 3 choices
1) Shut off the device
2) do uncoordinated idle injection for 40% of the time
3) do coordinated idle injection for 5% of the time
as much as force injecting idle in a synchronized way sucks, the alternatives are worse.
>
--
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