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:0.023 / U:31.020 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site