From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752810AbZHXPqG (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:46:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752775AbZHXPqD (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:46:03 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:36945 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752766AbZHXPqC (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:46:02 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/15] sched: Add parameter sched_mn_power_savings to control MN domain sched policy From: Peter Zijlstra To: svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: Andreas Herrmann , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Gautham Shenoy , Srivatsa Vaddagiri , Dipankar Sarma , Balbir Singh , Arun R Bharadwaj In-Reply-To: <20090824153229.GL6474@dirshya.in.ibm.com> References: <20090820131243.GO29327@alberich.amd.com> <20090820133914.GW29327@alberich.amd.com> <1251125778.7538.268.camel@twins> <20090824153229.GL6474@dirshya.in.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:45:14 +0200 Message-Id: <1251128714.7538.308.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 21:02 +0530, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: > * Peter Zijlstra [2009-08-24 16:56:18]: > > > On Thu, 2009-08-20 at 15:39 +0200, Andreas Herrmann wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: Andreas Herrmann > > > --- > > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_MN > > > + if (!err && mc_capable()) > > > + err = sysfs_create_file(&cls->kset.kobj, > > > + &attr_sched_mn_power_savings.attr); > > > +#endif > > > > *sigh* another crappy sysfs file > > > > Guys, can't we come up with anything better than sched_*_power_saving=n? > > > > This configuration space is _way_ too large, and now it gets even > > crazier. > > Hi Peter and Andreas, > > Actually we had sched_power_savings and related simplifications, but > that did not really simplify the interface. Well, I prefer a single sched_power knob that either goes on or off. A user really isn't interested in exploring a 3^3 configuration space {PERF, POWER, POWER-WAKE-BALANCE} x {SMT, MC, MN} in order to find what works best. > As for this mulit-node MN stuff, Gautham had posted a better solution > to propagate the sched_mc flags without need for new sysfs file and > related changes. > > Please take a look at: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/3/31/137 and > http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/3/31/142 which actually degenerates the > domain. Ah, right, that got lost in my inbox :/ Let me go read those too. > However Andreas's requirement seem to indicate multiple nodes within > a single socket. I did not yet completely understand that topology. > Some for of smart degeneration may save an additional tunable here. Yes, apparently AMD is going to put multiple nodes in a single socket, not sure how they do that, Andreas do these chips have multiple memory busses? I was thinking chips were pin constrained and wouldn't add a whole second memory interface to the package, but what do I know...