From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
To: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Doug Smythies <dsmythies@telus.net>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 05:44:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0hDe=pNmWFC6fYADi=vP+WFN+7yvwOZvq_pRMARzUnoiw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1460219974.3700.39.camel@gmail.com>
On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hm, setting gov=performance, and taking the average of 3 30 second
> interval PkgWatt samples as pipe-test runs..
>
> 714KHz/28.03Ws = 25.46
> 877KHz/30.28Ws = 28.96
>
> ..for pipe-test, the tradeoff look a bit more like red than green.
Well, fair enough, but that's just pipe-test, and what about the
people who don't see the performance gain and see the energy loss,
like Doug?
Essentially, this trades performance gains in somewhat special
workloads for increased energy consumption in idle. Those workloads
need not be run by everybody, but idle is.
That said I applied the patch you're complaining about mostly because
the commit that introduced the change in question in 4.5 claimed that
it wouldn't affect idle power on systems with reasonably fast C1, but
that didn't pass the reality test. I'm not totally against restoring
that change, but it would need to be based on very solid evidence.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-10 3:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-08 5:20 [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732 Mike Galbraith
2016-04-08 6:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-08 6:50 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-08 20:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-04-08 22:19 ` Doug Smythies
2016-04-09 6:44 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-09 7:17 ` Doug Smythies
2016-04-09 7:27 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-09 11:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-09 6:40 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-09 12:33 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-04-09 15:10 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-09 16:39 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-10 3:44 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2016-04-10 7:16 ` Doug Smythies
2016-04-10 9:35 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-10 14:54 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-09 11:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-09 12:31 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-04-10 15:39 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-10 20:24 ` Rik van Riel
2016-04-11 3:04 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-11 12:38 ` Rik van Riel
2016-04-11 13:21 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-04-11 13:38 ` Rik van Riel
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='CAJZ5v0hDe=pNmWFC6fYADi=vP+WFN+7yvwOZvq_pRMARzUnoiw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=dsmythies@telus.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).