Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933221Ab3GPPXP (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jul 2013 11:23:15 -0400 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([143.182.124.37]:60057 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932864Ab3GPPXK (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jul 2013 11:23:10 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,677,1367996400"; d="scan'208";a="332180235" Message-ID: <51E5655C.7050304@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 08:23:08 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Catalin Marinas CC: Peter Zijlstra , Morten Rasmussen , "mingo@kernel.org" , "vincent.guittot@linaro.org" , "preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "alex.shi@intel.com" , "efault@gmx.de" , "pjt@google.com" , "len.brown@intel.com" , "corbet@lwn.net" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "torvalds@linux-foundation.org" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org" Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] sched: Power scheduler design proposal References: <1373385338-12983-1-git-send-email-morten.rasmussen@arm.com> <20130713064909.GW25631@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20130713102350.GA8067@MacBook-Pro.local> <20130715203922.GD23818@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20130716124248.GB10036@arm.com> In-Reply-To: <20130716124248.GB10036@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; 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: 1115 Lines: 26 On 7/16/2013 5:42 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > Morten's power scheduler tries to address the above and it will grow > into controlling a new model of power driver (and taking into account > Arjan's and others' comments regarding the API). At the same time, we > need some form of task packing. The power scheduler can drive this > (currently via cpu_power) or can simply turn a knob if there are better > options that will be accepted in the scheduler. how much would you be helped if there was a simple switch sort left versus sort right (assuming the big cores are all either low or high numbers) the sorting is mostly statistical, but that's good enough in practice.. each time a task wakes up, you get a bias towards either low or high numbered idle cpus very quickly all tasks will be on one side, unless your system is so loaded that all cpus are full. -- 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/