From: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/8] Tunable sched_mc_power_savings=n
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 23:16:55 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090108174655.GQ4574@dirshya.in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1231402008.5721.37.camel@marge.simson.net>
* Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> [2009-01-08 09:06:48]:
> On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 21:05 +0530, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote:
>
> > sched_mc=2 depends on NEWIDLE but the wakeup biasing part will be
> > enabled even without this flag. The power savings will be marginally
> > better than sched_mc=1 without NEWIDLE. But the end user can have
> > that setup if they want to.
>
> That implies to me that there should exist a flag SD_WAKEUP_BIAS or
> whatnot. All settings should be visible. Currently, sched_mc > 0 turns
> on NEWIDLE, which is visible, but 2 turns on this 'invisible to the
> ultimate low-level control interface' thing.
Having a feature flag for each power saving balance is possible but
will be an overkill since independent control of features at each
sched domain may not yield useful configurations. The present power
saving heuristics that gets enabled at sched_mc=1 is primarily
controlled by SD_POWERSAVE_BALANCE but has side effects and can be
rendered ineffective by changing other SD flags.
We did consider having individual SD_flag for each of the power
savings functions, but that quickly lead to too many possible
configurations with most of them incorrect or ineffective. In order
to improve the consumeability of the power saving features, we have
proposed to enhance the existing tunable with monotonically increasing
powersavings vs performance tradeoffs.
I agree with the 'visibility' to low level interface that you have
pointed out. It will be good to have flags showup at the low level
interface, but do end users like system administrators would want to
know and tune these flags? It makes sense with the current set of
flags which depict important scheduler features, but power savings
related flags only further qualify or emphasise existing functions and
control points in the scheduler.
In my opinion adding flags for each powersaving feature will add
un-necessary complexity and may not be as useful to end users.
--Vaidy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-08 17:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-18 17:55 Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 1/8] sched: convert BALANCE_FOR_xx_POWER to inline functions Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 2/8] sched: Framework for sched_mc/smt_power_savings=N Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 3/8] sched: favour lower logical cpu number for sched_mc balance Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 4/8] sched: nominate preferred wakeup cpu Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 18:12 ` Balbir Singh
2008-12-19 21:55 ` Andrew Morton
2008-12-19 22:19 ` Andrew Morton
2008-12-19 22:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-19 22:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-19 22:38 ` Andrew Morton
2008-12-19 22:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-20 4:36 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-20 4:44 ` Andrew Morton
2008-12-20 7:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-20 10:02 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-20 10:36 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-20 10:56 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-21 8:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 5/8] sched: bias task wakeups to preferred semi-idle packages Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 18:11 ` Balbir Singh
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 6/8] sched: activate active load balancing in new idle cpus Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 7/8] sched: add SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE at MC and CPU level for sched_mc>0 Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 8/8] sched: idle_balance() does not call load_balance_newidle() Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 18:12 ` Balbir Singh
2008-12-18 20:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-18 20:19 ` [PATCH v7 0/8] Tunable sched_mc_power_savings=n Ingo Molnar
2008-12-18 20:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-19 8:29 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-19 8:24 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-19 13:34 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-29 23:43 ` MinChan Kim
2008-12-30 2:48 ` Balbir Singh
2008-12-30 6:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-30 6:44 ` Balbir Singh
2008-12-30 7:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-30 18:07 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-02 7:26 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-02 22:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 7:29 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-03 10:16 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-03 11:22 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-04 15:00 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-04 18:19 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-04 19:52 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-05 3:20 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-05 4:40 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-05 6:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-05 15:19 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-06 9:31 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-06 15:07 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-06 17:48 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-06 18:45 ` Balbir Singh
2009-01-07 8:59 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-07 11:26 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-07 14:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-07 15:35 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-08 8:06 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-08 17:46 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan [this message]
2009-01-09 6:00 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-06 14:54 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-30 17:31 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090108174655.GQ4574@dirshya.in.ibm.com \
--to=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome