From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751652AbcJKGaa (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2016 02:30:30 -0400 Received: from smtp.nue.novell.com ([195.135.221.5]:36179 "EHLO smtp.nue.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750717AbcJKGa3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2016 02:30:29 -0400 Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 08:30:05 +0200 From: Andreas Herrmann To: Viresh Kumar Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stratos Karafotis , Thomas Renninger Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] cpufreq/ondemand: Introduce op to customize mapping of load to frequency Message-ID: <20161011063005.GB4102@suselix.suse.de> References: <20160819121814.GA17296@suselix.suse.de> <20160923165632.GA9786@suselix.suse.de> <20160923170256.GB9786@suselix.suse.de> <20161005040118.GJ4664@vireshk-i7> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161005040118.GJ4664@vireshk-i7> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 09:31:18AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 23-09-16, 19:02, Andreas Herrmann wrote: > > Introduce op for ondemand governor that is used to map load to > > frequency. It allows a cpufreq driver to provide a specific mapping > > function if the generic function is not optimal for the driver. > > > > Performance results (kernel compile with different number of jobs) > > based on 4.8.0-rc7 (with and w/o my patches on top) from > > an HP ProLiant DL580 Gen8 system using pcc-cpufreq: > > - Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E7-4890 v2 @ 2.80GHz > > - 60 CPUs, 128GB RAM > > > > vanilla generic_map_load_to_freq function > > # of jobs user sys elapsed % CPU user sys elapsed % CPU > > 2 445.44 110.51 272.99 203.00 445.56 111.22 273.35 203.00 > > 4 444.41 126.20 142.81 399.00 445.61 126.10 143.12 399.00 > > 8 483.04 150.58 82.19 770.40 483.51 150.84 82.17 771.40 > > 16 626.81 185.01 55.00 1475.40 628.01 185.54 55.02 1477.80 > > 32 816.72 204.39 37.26 2740.00 818.58 205.51 37.02 2765.40 > > 64 406.59 51.12 14.04 3257.80 406.22 51.84 13.84 3308.80 > > 120 413.00 48.39 14.36 3211.20 413.61 49.06 14.54 3181.00 > > > > Similar tests on another system using acpi_cpufreq didn't show > > significant performance differences between these two kernel versions. > > > > Link: https://marc.info/?i=20160819121814.GA17296%40suselix.suse.de > > Signed-off-by: Andreas Herrmann > > --- > > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h | 5 +++++ > > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > > 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > NAK. > > If we are absolutely required to hack it in some way, then I would > prefer your first patchset as the noise was limited to only your > driver. > > We aren't going to provide such operations from the governors, sorry. Yep, understandable. Andreas