Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
IronPort-Data: =?us-ascii?q?A9a23=3AGJpiAK0+5EntTj2VtfbD5WBzkn2cJEfYwER7XOP?=
 =?us-ascii?q?LsXnJgWgm02YDmGUfDG+Gb/yPMTened1/aoq29x5TuZHUy4U2QQE+nZ1PZyIT+?=
 =?us-ascii?q?JCdXbx1DW+pYnjMdpWbJK5fAnR3huDodKjYdVeB4EfyWlTdhSMkj/jRHuCsULS?=
 =?us-ascii?q?s1h1ZHmeIdg9w0HqPpMZp2uaEsfDha++8kYuaT//3YDdJ6BYoWo4g0J9vnTs01?=
 =?us-ascii?q?BjEVJz0iXRlDRxDlAe2e3D4l/vzL4npR5fzatE88uJX24/+IL+FEmPxp3/BC/u?=
 =?us-ascii?q?lm7rhc0AMKlLQFVjTzCQGHfH4214b+XdaPqUTbZLwbW9VljGIlpZ1wcpEsZiYS?=
 =?us-ascii?q?AEzP6SKlv51vxxwSnkkZ/IZp9crJlD666R/1Xbuf2Dp0uluDUwtFZEV/vtsR2d?=
 =?us-ascii?q?D6ZQwMyoMaBGdjvnw2Lu9RvNxmM0vJeHvPYUCqjdhyy3UCbAtRpWra6HH49Vw3?=
 =?us-ascii?q?zoqgM1KW/HEaKIxczhwRA7CfAxUPVwUCdQ4kfvArmf+aTBDqBSWuK8++UDXzQp?=
 =?us-ascii?q?4yr+rN8DaEvSORMNIjgOAo0rY8GnjRBIXLtqSzXyC6H3EruvOmz7rHYEfDru18?=
 =?us-ascii?q?tZ0j1CJgG8eEhsbUR28u/bRt6IUc7qzMGRNpXFo9PJrshL7CImgGQe1vjifsAR?=
 =?us-ascii?q?aXddMe9DWITqlksL8izt1zEBdJtKZVOEbiQ=3D=3D?=
IronPort-HdrOrdr: =?us-ascii?q?A9a23=3Aue7oYatwqwOcuG9rDm9G7+hw7skDYdV00zEX?=
 =?us-ascii?q?/kB9WHVpm6uj5qWTdZUgpH3JYVMqKRUdcL+7VJVoLUmyyXcN2+ks1NSZLWrbUQ?=
 =?us-ascii?q?mTTb2KhLGKq1bd8kvFmNK1vp0MT0ERMrfNMWQ=3D?=
Date:   Thu, 28 Oct 2021 19:10:48 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>
To:     Doug Smythies <dsmythies@telus.net>
cc:     Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: problem in changing from active to passive mode
In-Reply-To: <CAAYoRsWXew+9Pch_9ux+UK0LFwy+211d2LmNLGKF_UTr3eS2Fw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2110281908150.9518@hadrien>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2110241452460.2997@hadrien> <CAAYoRsXeQravNXKsWAZvacMmE_iBzaQ+mQxNbB5jcD_vkny+Sg@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2110261658440.3825@hadrien> <CAAYoRsWXew+9Pch_9ux+UK0LFwy+211d2LmNLGKF_UTr3eS2Fw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.22 (DEB 394 2020-01-19)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

> Now, for your graph 3, are you saying this pseudo
> code of the process is repeatable?:
>
> Power up the system, booting kernel 5.9
> switch to passive/schedutil.
> wait X minutes for system to settle
> do benchmark, result ~13 seconds
> re-boot to kernel 5.15-RC
> switch to passive/schedutil.
> wait X minutes for system to settle
> do benchmark, result ~40 seconds
> re-boot to kernel 5.9
> switch to passive/schedutil.
> wait X minutes for system to settle
> do benchmark, result ~28 seconds

In the first boot of 5.9, the des (desired?) field of the HWP_REQUEST
register is 0 and in the second boot (after booting 5.15 and entering
passive mode) it is 10.  I don't know though if this is a bug or a
feature...

julia