Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933149AbcJTHlh (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Oct 2016 03:41:37 -0400 Received: from mail-qk0-f195.google.com ([209.85.220.195]:36022 "EHLO mail-qk0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750793AbcJTHlg (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Oct 2016 03:41:36 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: sedat.dilek@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <2198826.9suuMCzPZN@vostro.rjw.lan> References: <2198826.9suuMCzPZN@vostro.rjw.lan> From: Sedat Dilek Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 09:41:34 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [4.9-rc1] Build-time 2x slower To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?J=C3=B6rg_Otte?= , Linus Torvalds , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Michal Marek , Ming Lei , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mail.home.local id u9K7ffZd023380 Content-Length: 2512 Lines: 57 On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 06:59:35 PM Jörg Otte wrote: >> 2016-10-19 17:29 GMT+02:00 Linus Torvalds : >> > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 4:07 AM, Jörg Otte wrote: >> >> >> >> Additional info: I usally use schedutil governor. >> >> If I switch to performance governor problems go away. >> >> Maybe a cpufreq problem? >> > >> > Oh, I completely misread the original bug report, and then didn't read >> > your confirmation email right. >> > >> > I thought you had a slower build of the different kernels (when >> > building on the same kernel), and that the _build_ itself had slowed >> > down for some reason. But you're actually saying that doing the _same_ >> > build actually takes longer when running on 4.9-rc1. >> >> Exactly! >> >> Btw: ondemand governor is also good. >> >> > There are a few small cpufreq changes there in between commit >> > 29fbff8698fc (that you reported was fine - please tell me I got _that_ >> > right, at least?) and 4.9-rc1. >> >> Perfect! That's what I mean. >> >> > Adding Rafael to the cc. >> > >> > That said, none of them look all that likely to me. It *would* be good >> > if you could bisect it a bit (perhaps not fully, but a couple of >> > bisection steps to narrow down what area it is). >> >> I try that tomorrow. > > Well, please try commit ef98988ba369 (Merge tag 'pm-extra-4.9-rc1' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm) which is the > merge introducing the late cpufreq changes. If the issue is there, please > try to revert commit 899bb6642f2a (cpufreq: skip invalid entries when searching > the frequency) which is the only cpufreq one that may matter for the schedutil > governor (and I have one fix for that commit queued up already). > Is "cpufreq: fix overflow in cpufreq_table_find_index_dl()" the fix you are speaking of? Fixes: 899bb6642f2a (cpufreq: skip invalid entries when searching the frequency) If yes, can you add a hint in the commit message describing the impact like here a slow-down of building a linux-kernel. With a reference to this ML-thread? I try to test this but don't be disappointed if you get no answer. - Sedat - [1] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/commit/?h=linux-next&id=f7a7a80ae30521b65a6dfc98df45d3ec9e238d73 [2] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/patch/?id=f7a7a80ae30521b65a6dfc98df45d3ec9e238d73