Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752731AbcDIHR5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Apr 2016 03:17:57 -0400 Received: from cmta3.telus.net ([209.171.16.76]:38626 "EHLO cmta3.telus.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751774AbcDIHR4 (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Apr 2016 03:17:56 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=b4JPmYyx c=1 sm=2 tr=0 a=zJWegnE7BH9C0Gl4FFgQyA==:117 a=zJWegnE7BH9C0Gl4FFgQyA==:17 a=L9H7d07YOLsA:10 a=9cW_t1CCXrUA:10 a=s5jvgZ67dGcA:10 a=Pyq9K9CWowscuQLKlpiwfMBGOR0=:19 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=6-HEoy7QlTd0-NiL74sA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 X-Telus-Outbound-IP: 173.180.45.4 From: "Doug Smythies" To: "'Mike Galbraith'" Cc: "'Peter Zijlstra'" , "'Rafael J. Wysocki'" , "'LKML'" , "'Linux PM list'" , "'Rik van Riel'" , "'Rafael J. Wysocki'" References: <1460092854.4051.1.camel@gmail.com> <20160408064510.GK3448@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <1460098254.5582.17.camel@gmail.com> <2428384.mEkP3EOpsR@vostro.rjw.lan> <001101d191e4$b00602d0$10120870$@net> In-Reply-To: <001101d191e4$b00602d0$10120870$@net> Subject: RE: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732 Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2016 00:17:52 -0700 Message-ID: <001e01d1922f$ef219a10$cd64ce30$@net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AdGR2UC1ZFfNY+DvRB+QHJfu26p9PQACpfZwABIgT+A= Content-Language: en-ca Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1200 Lines: 35 On 2016.04.08 15:19 Doug Smythies wrote: > On 2016.04.08 14:00 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: >>> On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>> >>>> Cute, I thought you used governor=performance for your runs? >>> >>> I do, and those numbers are with it thus set. >> Well, this is a trade-off. >> >> 4.5 introduced a power regression here so this one goes back to the previous >> state of things. > Mike: > > Could you send me, or point me to, the program "pipe-test"? > So far, I have only found one, but it is both old and not > the same program you are running (based on print statements). > > I realize I might not be to recreate your problem scenario anyhow, > I just want to try. I still didn't find the exact same program, but I think I found some earlier version of the correct test. I get (long term average): Kernel 4.4.0-17: Powersave 3.93 usecs/loop ; Performance 3.93 usecs/loop 0.89 Kernel 4.5-rc7: Powersave 3.47 usecs/loop ; Performance 3.51 usecs/loop 1.00 Kernel 4.6-rc1: Powersave 3.84 usecs/loop ; Performance 3.88 usecs/loop 0.90 So, similar results (so far, I didn't try reverted yet). ... Doug