lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC 0/4] Scheduler idle notifiers and users

* Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 2012-02-08 at 15:23 -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > I think the biggest mistake we ever made with cpufreq was making it
> > so configurable. If we redesign it, just say no to plugin governors,
> > and
> > yes to a lot fewer sysfs knobs.
> >
> > So, provide mechanism to kill off all the governors, and there's a
> > migration path from what we have now to something that just works
> > in a lot more cases, while remaining configurable enough for the
> > corner-cases.
>
> On the other hand, the need for schedulable contxts may not
> necessarily go away.

We will support it, but the *sane* hw solution is where
frequency transitions can be done atomically. Most workloads
change their characteristics very quickly, and so does their
power management profile change.

The user-space driven policy model failed for that reason: it
was *way* too slow in reacting) - and slow hardware transitions
suck for a similar reason as well.

We accomodate all hardware as well as we can, but we *design*
for proper hardware. So Peter is right, this should be done
properly.

Thanks,

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-09 08:53    [W:0.121 / U:0.908 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site