[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160913073439.GD5008@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 09:34:39 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc: Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@....com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steve Muckle <smuckle@...aro.org>,
Doug Smythies <doug.smythies@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [Resend][PATCH 1/3] cpufreq / sched: SCHED_CPUFREQ_IOWAIT flag
to indicate iowait condition
On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 11:59:33PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
>
> Testing indicates that it is possible to improve performace
> significantly without increasing energy consumption too much by
> teaching cpufreq governors to bump up the CPU performance level if
> the in_iowait flag is set for the task in enqueue_task_fair().
>
> For this purpose, define a new cpufreq_update_util() flag
> SCHED_CPUFREQ_IOWAIT and modify enqueue_task_fair() to pass that
> flag to cpufreq_update_util() in the in_iowait case. That generally
> requires cpufreq_update_util() to be called directly from there,
> because update_load_avg() may not be invoked in that case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> Looks-good-to: Steve Muckle <smuckle@...aro.org>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists