[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <001a01d3be0a$ad3a0ed0$07ae2c70$@net>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 09:11:53 -0700
From: "Doug Smythies" <dsmythies@...us.net>
To: "'Thomas Ilsche'" <thomas.ilsche@...dresden.de>,
"'Rafael J. Wysocki'" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"'Peter Zijlstra'" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"'Linux PM'" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"'Frederic Weisbecker'" <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: "'Thomas Gleixner'" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"'Paul McKenney'" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"'Rik van Riel'" <riel@...riel.com>,
"'Aubrey Li'" <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>,
"'Mike Galbraith'" <mgalbraith@...e.de>,
"'LKML'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Doug Smythies" <dsmythies@...us.net>
Subject: RE: [RFT][PATCH v5 0/7] sched/cpuidle: Idle loop rework
On 2018.03.17 Thomas Ilsche wrote:
> Over the last week I tested v4+pollv2 and now v5+pollv3. With v5, I
> observe a particular idle behavior, that I have not seen before with
> v4. On a dual-socket Skylake system the idle power increases from
> 74.1 W (system total) to 85.5 W with a 300 HZ build and even to
> 138.3 W with a 1000 HZ build. A similar Haswell-EP system is also
> affected.
I confirm your idle findings. There is a regression between V4 and V5.
The differences on my test computer are much less than on yours,
probably because I have only 8 CPUs.
http://fast.smythies.com/rjw_idle.png
1000 Hz kernel only.
... Doug
Powered by blists - more mailing lists