[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHmME9pigvAgK3Bje6DkFEcdyWwi7-C7D6QEo4YiH_cbJvxqhQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 22:21:08 -0600
From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
bberg@...hat.com, bp@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86/mce/therm_throt: allow disabling the thermal
vector altogether
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 9:38 PM Srinivas Pandruvada
<srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2020-04-07 at 00:33 -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > The thermal IRQ handler uses 1.21% CPU on my system when it's hot
> > from
> > compiling things. Indeed looking at /proc/interrupts reveals quite a
> > lot
> I am curious why you are hitting threshold frequently?
> What is rdmsr 0x1a2
5640000
> > of events coming in. Beyond logging them, the existing drivers on the
> > system don't appear to do very much that I'm interested in. So, add a
> > way to disable this entirely so that I can regain precious CPU
> > cycles.
> It is showing amount of time system is running in a constrained
> environment. Lots of real time and HPC folks really care about this.
Which is why this patch adds an option, not a full removal or
something. Real time and HPC people can keep their expensive
interrupt. Other people with different varieties of system can disable
it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists