[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1460302797.4383.44.camel@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 17:39:57 +0200
From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Doug Smythies <dsmythies@...us.net>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to
0c313cb20732
On Sat, 2016-04-09 at 14:31 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 10:59:59PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Cute, I thought you used governor=performance for your runs?
> > > >
> > > > I do, and those numbers are with it thus set.
> > >
> > > Well, this is a trade-off.
> > >
> > > 4.5 introduced a power regression here so this one goes back to
> > > the previous
> > > state of things.
> >
> > Just for my elucidation; how can gov=performance have a 'power'
> > regression?
>
> Because of what is used as the "default" idle state most of the time.
>
> C1 was used before 4.5 and that changed to polling in 4.5.
Should the default idle state not then be governor dependent? When I
set gov=performance, I'm expecting box to go just as fast as it can go
without melting. Does polling risk CPU -> lava conversion?
-Mike
Powered by blists - more mailing lists