From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDB28FC6195 for ; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 17:04:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94989206BA for ; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 17:04:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=telus.net header.i=@telus.net header.b="tbJ2nJ7q" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730193AbfKHREj (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Nov 2019 12:04:39 -0500 Received: from cmta16.telus.net ([209.171.16.89]:60689 "EHLO cmta16.telus.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727210AbfKHREj (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Nov 2019 12:04:39 -0500 Received: from dougxps ([173.180.45.4]) by cmsmtp with SMTP id T7gYiAcEVFXoiT7gZi2lPR; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 10:04:37 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telus.net; s=neo; t=1573232677; bh=wC6fXQQ5fyNUky0F/VUsvZ5e9+3RjjFQ4Uok7ILvjc4=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date; b=tbJ2nJ7qcFM4p43E1W/OSprLTFFpgP5FKDiVqvGe+BYF+5h0oPy046ZPjWgU+fvQm 7sG/tjVb2fwt1AAkbN1t01zZvHYOmacCYa/8F+Rk0zC2b9klFmqpXZsCtyAlrZq/Uu lLXVcw5xioIA13la/OUkpEj2bHjOy9p0H3aEpldYMGfG9g5Emkzig/2GOIEfBzAcUl YqN18U68id+cpHHQ4cisYlds3sbT+0yR1Y1c001FVLiHDPHkp4IbS43p01RqjsbEK/ 1E9R97JlmeMfT94ScwX6ERXq/4qkes+Ys1osptGVLnT4qSTK/iUMIrdZDT+t4ZEB0H IOA//u9QVuruA== X-Telus-Authed: none X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=HoEI5HbS c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=zJWegnE7BH9C0Gl4FFgQyA==:117 a=zJWegnE7BH9C0Gl4FFgQyA==:17 a=Pyq9K9CWowscuQLKlpiwfMBGOR0=:19 a=jpOVt7BSZ2e4Z31A5e1TngXxSK0=:19 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=aatUQebYAAAA:8 a=FGbulvE0AAAA:8 a=njq2HdyGrEXifyybg1YA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=7715FyvI7WU-l6oqrZBK:22 a=svzTaB3SJmTkU8mK-ULk:22 From: "Doug Smythies" To: "'Rafael J. Wysocki'" Cc: "'Peter Zijlstra'" , "'Daniel Lezcano'" , "'LKML'" , "'Giovanni Gherdovich'" , "'Rafael J. Wysocki'" , "'Linux PM'" References: <10494959.bKODIZ00nm@kreacher> <3269796.AzLOQfDnpo@kreacher> <000701d59610$e0b3caa0$a21b5fe0$@net> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] cpuidle: Use nanoseconds as the unit of time Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 09:04:33 -0800 Message-ID: <000a01d59656$99798710$cc6c9530$@net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Content-Language: en-ca Thread-Index: AdWWGTqsWC7i2bnvR8OiOnG3vd+ivAANZWkQ X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfOUqsbqb5Xx5fl5wUa+35jsFoL8q+N2hsfatLIHH4zhd7m/EkTUcXPvoP4DoJ99usQM2ulQQ52ZcaIGEq73YfYmx8p5HLx2qYW/SYamu2VYnjiHa+U1V q7otdmtguwQ9tuBOgauQ7R0O3n1trYY4HTK0N92aGLNPoKB9J+tjc5fZL6Z+53BSkJM9PdSe5VHzpQdmZQAhTmHIU+/bXQ5owIls7aKmbbsxq3YN2a/q8HYg 8SFpkx4+AGVfRf5a2fwzWe7irx6FLScCL73DJWXFDHGp5QmWW88D2t2hUR+ako9ePnbGFiEGMPLBZWX0m3yOyVlCQMwcfOAtxM2RHRLH22FlZenzvkBhW4zr WFNiB0ae Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2019.11.08 01:45 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:45 AM Doug Smythies wrote: > ... >> I have been running this v2 today, with both menu and teo >> governors. Acquiring some baseline reference data to compare >> to now. The menu governor response seems different (Supporting >> information/graphs will come later). > > That may be good or bad, depending in what way it is different. :-) My thinking was that the differences should be minimal between the baseline (linux-next as of 2019.11.07) and plus your two patches. Because this was a change of units, but not functionality. Such is the case with the teo governor, but not the menu governor. I have not tried the ladder or haltpoll governors, and don't intend to. Now to attempt to isolate the issue in the code, which might take considerable time. The test in question was that sweep one developed during the powernightmare stuff. It is a crude attempt to sweep through a preference for all idle states. While not a great test, who cares if it reveals something. Reference: http://www.smythies.com/~doug/linux/idle/nano-second-conversion/sweep/index.html Legend: teo-base : linux-next 2019.11.07 menu-base: linux-next 2019.11.07 teo-v2 : linux-next 2019.11.07 + cpuidle: Consolidate disabled state checks + this v2 menu-v2 : linux-next 2019.11.07 + cpuidle: Consolidate disabled state checks + this v2 Note: I only tossed the graphs there, without a way to navigate to the location from the parent web pages. ... Doug