From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754244AbcIDPy6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Sep 2016 11:54:58 -0400 Received: from cmta17.telus.net ([209.171.16.90]:33325 "EHLO cmta17.telus.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753549AbcIDPyz (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Sep 2016 11:54:55 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=XtgVARN9 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=zJWegnE7BH9C0Gl4FFgQyA==:117 a=zJWegnE7BH9C0Gl4FFgQyA==:17 a=Pyq9K9CWowscuQLKlpiwfMBGOR0=:19 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=Pdleyr23BNROjofXl_gA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 From: "Doug Smythies" To: "'Rafael J. Wysocki'" , "'Linux PM list'" Cc: "'Linux Kernel Mailing List'" , "'Srinivas Pandruvada'" , "'Peter Zijlstra'" , "'Viresh Kumar'" , "'Ingo Molnar'" , "'Vincent Guittot'" , "'Morten Rasmussen'" , "'Juri Lelli'" , "'Dietmar Eggemann'" , "'Steve Muckle'" , "'Doug Smythies'" References: fzIkbye3fIF3xfzInbIYuf In-Reply-To: fzIkbye3fIF3xfzInbIYuf Subject: RE: [RFC/RFT][PATCH 0/4] cpufreq / sched: iowait boost in intel_pstate and schedutil Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 08:54:49 -0700 Message-ID: <000401d206c4$ad0db8c0$07292a40$@net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AdIFfmek+5x/iydvTte7UpA2ojEgYgBPVtIg Content-Language: en-ca X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfAg2YKVnmovcNdA+cQNEtqQTdz/2LFLtIaCbWkI94S7yqzD8Qh95/d1VYiztcwFbXSSlXu4umRIiip/MwFNyKgYhbNc8iA3aDBQwHFbwsrU3KkSItC50 llODw+8L1KW3eNxCyDjcb/2MC7RiV5N+PoMX+jGeJNZ2LWaEWKGWAz4e4F7GzhciNUxkBq2sJMKEXJH2YuMPy5VSws/2PfmnmOI9Egu1Xe3itEwgWHiY0ctB 8S1qw+j9tVnpTJPexMBeHTrvVKvgcU1UR83rHj1i1hRADQDhZoS+FpvcAjokke8Vdo020ZtXR/KSeZ9ZNe/9s8EZYXm4wZZcCOYRzB4Of8KKtq9YDSMB6NQH MX8b+7EVpnCsaw4tgSGJj8glx/LjSKDrzooYehJMwq+uPgR4ajOJL4Iyk0I+LnS8lHTcp0g40F0Qh4Yw82BCQKy/OwnHrhE4xQmy1YO7v2zVSU6kwNx2vMKP zuzpOO9Q99gonE0IQbhtAvPr8ftLxBikq8Fii3sM0KztK8k1jBP2KclqnreXIKsaaqL/kqRDGYSAMGsma5R+IXe96WUUuXEn7DAGIpA0ff1gbhUMSk99RYrL O64= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Rafael, On 2016.09.02 17:57 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > This is a new version of the "iowait boost" series I posted a few weeks > ago. Since the first two patches from that series have been reworked and > are in linux-next now, I've rebased this series on top of my linux-next > branch. > > In addition to that I took the Doug's feedback into account in the > intel_pstate patches [2-3/4]. You got ahead of me a little. Recall the suggestion for the addition of some filtering was based on energy savings. And further that it might make sense to use average pstate as input to the filter (your new patch 3 of 4). In my testing (of the old patch set) I have been finding that some of those energy savings are being given back by the average pstate method, putting its value added into question. Switching to the new patch set, I made two kernels (based on 4.8-rc4 + your pre-requisite 2 patches): rfc4: has all 4 patches. rfc2: has patches 1, 2, 4. (does not have the average pstate change) Using my SpecPower simulator test at 20% load I get: Unpatched (reference): ~5905 Joules rfc4: ~ 6232 Joules (+5.5%) rfc2: ~ 6075 Joules (+2.9%) Old rfc, no filter (restated): ~7197 Joules (+21.9%) Old rfc + old iir filter V2: ~5967 Joules (+1%) Old rfc + old ave pstate method: ~6275 Joules (+6.3%) Srinivas was getting considerably different, but still encouraging, numbers on the real SpecPower test beds. I would like to suggest/ask that those real SpecPower tests be done first so as to decide a preferred way forward. I'll also re-do my simulator tests over a longer time period and at some other loads (currently 20% is hard coded). ... Doug