From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Hook up powerclamp with PM QOS and cpuidle
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 12:56:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131127115634.GA10022@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1385508011-26914-1-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 03:20:08PM -0800, Jacob Pan wrote:
> This patchset is intended to address the behavior change and efficiency
> loss introduced by using consolidated idle routine in powerclamp driver.
>
> Specifically,
> [PATCH 3/8] idle, thermal, acpi: Remove home grown idle implementations
>
> The motivation is that after using common idle routine, powerclamp driver
> can no longer pick the deepest idle state needed to conserve power.
> Idle state is selected by governors which can be influenced by PM QOS and
> other factors. This patchset hooks up powerclamp idle injection with PM
> QOS and eventually influce idle governors to pick the power saving target
> states.
>
> There are some downside of this approach. Due to overhead, communication
> with PM QOS is at enable/disable idle injection time instead of each
> injection period. The implication is that if the system natual idle is
> more than target injected idle, powerclamp will skip some injection period.
> During this period however, deepest idle state may still be chosen
> necessarily regardless the latency constraint.
Does the QoS stuff have a means of notifying its users of constraints
violation? I suspect some applications might light to be told if their
requests aren't honoured.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-27 11:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-26 23:20 Jacob Pan
2013-11-26 23:20 ` [PATCH 1/3] pm/qos: allow state control of qos class Jacob Pan
2013-11-26 23:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-01-16 1:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-01-21 22:10 ` Jacob Pan
2014-01-21 23:15 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-01-21 23:47 ` Jacob Pan
2013-11-26 23:20 ` [PATCH 2/3] cpuidle: check for pm qos constraint override Jacob Pan
2013-11-26 23:20 ` [PATCH 3/3] thermal/powerclamp: communicate with pm qos when injecting idle Jacob Pan
2013-11-27 11:56 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2013-11-27 16:47 ` [PATCH 0/3] Hook up powerclamp with PM QOS and cpuidle jacob pan
2013-11-27 20:47 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=20131127115634.GA10022@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
/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