From: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] cpuidle: menu: Cleanup after loadavg removal
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 11:55:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7d999005-4441-4b8a-b159-3d0ebc2ed9d9@arm.com> (raw)
The performance impact of loadavg was removed with commit a7fe5190c03f
("cpuidle: menu: Remove get_loadavg() from the performance multiplier")
With only iowait remaining the description can be simplified, remove
also the no longer needed includes.
Signed-off-by: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
---
| 17 +++++------------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
--git a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
index b96e3da0fedd..783b5d1dacdc 100644
--- a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
+++ b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
@@ -14,8 +14,6 @@
#include <linux/ktime.h>
#include <linux/hrtimer.h>
#include <linux/tick.h>
-#include <linux/sched.h>
-#include <linux/sched/loadavg.h>
#include <linux/sched/stat.h>
#include <linux/math64.h>
@@ -95,16 +93,11 @@
* state, and thus the less likely a busy CPU will hit such a deep
* C state.
*
- * Two factors are used in determing this multiplier:
- * a value of 10 is added for each point of "per cpu load average" we have.
- * a value of 5 points is added for each process that is waiting for
- * IO on this CPU.
- * (these values are experimentally determined)
- *
- * The load average factor gives a longer term (few seconds) input to the
- * decision, while the iowait value gives a cpu local instantanious input.
- * The iowait factor may look low, but realize that this is also already
- * represented in the system load average.
+ * Currently there is only one value determining the factor:
+ * 10 points are added for each process that is waiting for IO on this CPU.
+ * (This value was experimentally determined.)
+ * Utilization is no longer a factor as it was shown that it never contributed
+ * significantly to the performance multiplier in the first place.
*
*/
--
2.34.1
next reply other threads:[~2024-06-04 10:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-04 10:55 Christian Loehle [this message]
2024-06-07 18:56 ` 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=7d999005-4441-4b8a-b159-3d0ebc2ed9d9@arm.com \
--to=christian.loehle@arm.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®