All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andreas Mohr <andi@lisas.de>
To: Andreas Mohr <andi@lisas.de>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
	K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rafael@kernel.org, lenb@kernel.org,
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, bp@alien8.de, tglx@linutronix.de,
	puwen@hygon.cn, mario.limonciello@amd.com, peterz@infradead.org,
	rui.zhang@intel.com, gpiccoli@igalia.com,
	daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, ananth.narayan@amd.com,
	gautham.shenoy@amd.com, Calvin Ong <calvin.ong@amd.com>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, regressions@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: processor_idle: Skip dummy wait for processors based on the Zen microarchitecture
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2022 22:10:21 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YyzBLc+OFIN2BMz5@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yyy6l94G0O2B7Yh1@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de>

On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 09:42:15PM +0200, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> So one can see where my profiling effort went
> (*optimizing* things, not degrading them)
> --> hints that current Zen3-originating effort is not
> about a regression in the "regression bug" sense -
> merely a (albeit rather appreciable/sizeable... congrats!)
> performance deterioration vs.
> an optimal (currently non-achieved) software implementation state
> (also: of PORT-based handling [vs. MWAIT], mind you!).

I'd like to add a word of caution here:

AFAIK power management (here: ACPI Cx) handling generally is
about a painful *tradeoff* between
achieving best-possible performance (that's
the respectable Zen3 32MB/s vs. 33MB/s argument) and
achieving maximum power savings.
We all know that one can configure the system for
non-idle mode (idle=poll cmdline?) and
achieve record numbers in performance (...*and* power consumption - ouch!).

Current decision/implementation aspects AFAICS:
- why is the Zen3 config used here choosing
  less-favourable(?) PORT-based operation mode?
- Zen3 is said to not have the STPCLK# issue
  (- but then what about other more modern chipsets?)

--> we need to achieve (hopefully sufficiently precisely) a solution which
takes into account Zen3 STPCLK# improvements while
preserving "accepted" behaviour/requirements on *all* STPCLK#-hampered chipsets
("STPCLK# I/O wait is default/traditional handling"?).

Greetings

Andreas Mohr

-- 
GNU/Linux. It's not the software that's free, it's you.

  reply	other threads:[~2022-09-22 20:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-09-21  6:36 [PATCH] ACPI: processor_idle: Skip dummy wait for processors based on the Zen microarchitecture K Prateek Nayak
2022-09-21  8:47 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-09-21 10:39   ` K Prateek Nayak
2022-09-21 13:10     ` Borislav Petkov
2022-09-21 14:15 ` Dave Hansen
2022-09-21 19:51   ` Borislav Petkov
2022-09-21 19:55     ` Limonciello, Mario
2022-09-22  3:58     ` Ananth Narayan
2022-09-22  5:44   ` K Prateek Nayak
     [not found]   ` <20220923160106.9297-1-ermorton@ericmoronsm1mbp.amd.com>
2022-09-23 16:15     ` Ananth Narayan
2022-09-21 15:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-21 19:48   ` Borislav Petkov
2022-09-22  8:17     ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-22 15:21       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-09-22 15:36         ` Borislav Petkov
2022-09-22 15:53           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-09-22 16:36             ` Dave Hansen
2022-09-22 16:44 ` Dave Hansen
2022-09-22 16:54   ` K Prateek Nayak
2022-09-22 17:01     ` Dave Hansen
2022-09-22 17:48       ` Limonciello, Mario
2022-09-22 18:17         ` Dave Hansen
2022-09-22 18:28           ` Limonciello, Mario
2022-09-23 11:47             ` Ananth Narayan
2022-09-22 19:42       ` Andreas Mohr
2022-09-22 20:10         ` Andreas Mohr [this message]
2022-09-22 21:21           ` Dave Hansen
2022-09-22 21:38             ` Limonciello, Mario
2022-09-23  7:42             ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-23  7:57             ` Peter Zijlstra

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YyzBLc+OFIN2BMz5@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de \
    --to=andi@lisas.de \
    --cc=ananth.narayan@amd.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=calvin.ong@amd.com \
    --cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
    --cc=gpiccoli@igalia.com \
    --cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=puwen@hygon.cn \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=regressions@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.