[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <000e01d48f14$21ca7020$655f5060$@net>
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2018 08:36:07 -0800
From: "Doug Smythies" <dsmythies@...us.net>
To: "'Rafael J. Wysocki'" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: "'Rafael J. Wysocki'" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"'Linux Kernel Mailing List'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"'open list:DOCUMENTATION'" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"'Peter Zijlstra'" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"'Daniel Lezcano'" <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
"'Giovanni Gherdovich'" <ggherdovich@...e.cz>,
"'Linux PM'" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"Doug Smythies" <dsmythies@...us.net>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] cpuidle: Add 'high' and 'low' idle state metrics
On 2018.12.06 01:09 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 12:08 AM Doug Smythies <dsmythies@...us.net> wrote:
>> On 2018.12.03 04:32 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>
>>> Add two new metrics for CPU idle states, "high" and "low", to count
>>> the number of times the given state had been asked for (or entered
>>> from the kernel's perspective), but the observed idle duration turned
>>> out to be too high or too low for it (respectively).
>>
>> I wonder about the "high" "low" terminology here.
>
> I took these names, because they are concise and simple. I could use
> "below" and "above" respectively I guess. What about these?
I see you already sent a new patch with these names. Yes, myself I like
them better.
I am going to try to add these counts to my next sets of graphs.
... Doug
Powered by blists - more mailing lists