Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1423212Ab3FUP30 (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jun 2013 11:29:26 -0400 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:54008 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422915Ab3FUP3X (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jun 2013 11:29:23 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,913,1363158000"; d="scan'208";a="353586505" Message-ID: <51C4713C.5060505@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 08:29:00 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Morten Rasmussen CC: David Lang , Ingo Molnar , "alex.shi@intel.com" , "peterz@infradead.org" , "preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "vincent.guittot@linaro.org" , "efault@gmx.de" , "pjt@google.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org" , "len.brown@intel.com" , "corbet@lwn.net" , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , "tglx@linutronix.de" , Catalin Marinas Subject: Re: power-efficient scheduling design References: <20130530134718.GB32728@e103034-lin> <20130531105204.GE30394@gmail.com> <20130614160522.GG32728@e103034-lin> <51C07ABC.2080704@linux.intel.com> <51C1D0BB.3040705@linux.intel.com> <20130619170042.GH5460@e103034-lin> <51C1E58D.9000408@linux.intel.com> <20130621085002.GJ5460@e103034-lin> In-Reply-To: <20130621085002.GJ5460@e103034-lin> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1793 Lines: 36 On 6/21/2013 1:50 AM, Morten Rasmussen wrote: >>> in control of the p-state selection and changes it fast enough to match >>> the current load, the scheduler doesn't have to care? By fast enough I >>> mean, faster than the scheduler would notice if a cpu was temporarily >>> overloaded at a low p-state. In that case, you wouldn't need >>> cpufreq/p-state hints, and the scheduler would only move tasks between >>> cpus when cpus are fully loaded at their max p-state. >> >> with the migration hint, I'm pretty sure we'll be there today typically. > > A hint when a task is moved to a new cpu is too late if the migration > shouldn't have happened at all. If the scheduler knows that the cpu is > able to switch to a higher p-state it can decide to wait for the p-state > change instead of migrating the task and waking up another cpu. ok maybe I am missing something but at least on the hardware I am familiar with (Intel and somewhat AMD), the frequency (and voltage) when idle is ... 0 Hz... no matter what the OS chose for when the CPU is running. And when coming out of idle, as part of the cost of that, is ramping up to something appropriate. And such ramps are FAST. Changing P state is as a result generally quite fast as well... think "single digit microseconds" kind of fast. Much faster than waking a CPU up in the first place (by design.. since a wakeup of a CPU includes effectively a P state change) I read your statement as "lets wait for the idle CPU to ramp its frequency up first", which doesn't really make sense to me... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/