Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755659AbZA3O70 (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jan 2009 09:59:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752274AbZA3O7S (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jan 2009 09:59:18 -0500 Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:35788 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751631AbZA3O7R (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jan 2009 09:59:17 -0500 From: Thomas Renninger Organization: SUSE Products GmbH To: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org Subject: cpufreq on demand governor sampling rate restricted to HZ even on NO_HZ kernels Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 15:59:13 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.10.3 (Linux/2.6.27.11-HEAD_20090116074536_2c57617f-default; KDE/4.1.3; x86_64; ; ) Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200901301559.15170.trenn@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1415 Lines: 47 Hi, depending on HZ set to: 100 250 1000 the ondemand governor is currently limited to poll the CPU load and adjust the frequency (sampling rate sysfs variable) every: 200ms 80ms 20ms This limitation does not consider NO_HZ which looks wrong? If this is correct, can someone give me a pointer, I'd like to understand why. If NO_HZ can/should go down to 20ms polling and more (current CPUs are able to switch fast enough, so that the ondemand governor would calculate the default polling interval below 80ms for them), this would hurt in respect of C-states at some point. For performance reasons, one wants to poll as much as possible, for powersaving reasons (C-states), one wants to poll as seldom as possible. I wonder whether it makes sense to dynamically adjust the polling interval (e.g. by a hint (and initial wakeup) from the scheduler or taking C-states into account) to: - increase the sampling rate, e.g. based on context switching activity - lower sampling rate when the system is idle (to gain full C-state efficiency) Or in what other way deep C-states could be taken into account in respect of ondemand polling? Thanks, Thomas -- 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/