[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170718185506.n6s64gxford2ow2b@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 20:55:06 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
"Li, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...el.com>, tglx@...utronix.de,
len.brown@...el.com, rjw@...ysocki.net, tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, yang.zhang.wz@...il.com,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
daniel.lezcano@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 00/11] Create fast idle path for short idle periods
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:48:38PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 7/17/2017 12:23 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Of course, this all assumes a Gaussian distribution to begin with, if we
> > get bimodal (or worse) distributions we can still get it wrong. To fix
> > that, we'd need to do something better than what we currently have.
> >
>
> fwiw some time ago I made a chart for predicted vs actual so you can sort
> of judge the distribution of things visually
>
> http://git.fenrus.org/tmp/linux2.png
That shows we get it wrong a lot of times (about 50%, as per the
average) and moving the line has benefit. Since for performance you
really don't want to pick the deeper idle state, so you want to bias
your pick towards a shallower state.
Using the CDF approach you can quantify by how much you want it moved.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists