lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jul]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: RFC: revert request for cpuidle patches e11538d1 and 69a37bea
From
>> OK, I'll queue up the reverts as fixes for 3.11-rc4.
>
> So, the reverts are on the fixes-next branch of the linux-pm.git tree that you
> can access at
>
> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/log/?h=fixes-next
>
> However, they are not simple reverts as we've had some non-trivial changes on
> top of those commits already, so I'd appreciate it a lot if somebody could
> double check if I didn't break anything in them.

I've verified that the reverts improve netperf TCP_RR performance.

Here I've got two Xeon's, slightly different, so I run in both directions.
Also I run two ways -- Out-of-the-box, plus with cpufreq
set to max frequency. The reverts improve all 4 cases:

JKT → IVT IVT → JKT

3.11.0-rc2 baseline w/o revert Out of Box

20420 19963
20658 19915
20298 20320

3.11.0-rc2 baseline w/o revert max freq

59658 51427
59663 51503
59416 51343

3.11.0-rc2-00002-g74bce39 Linux-pm “fixes-next” branch

3.11.0-rc2-00002-g74bce39 Out of box
23227 22056
23306 22125
23387 40226 40k result saw some 2.2 ghz
vs 1.2 ghz in other runs
21991

3.11.0-rc2-00002-g74bce39 Max-freq
67240 57645
64880 56764
65924 57435

Tested-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>

thanks,
Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-07-27 09:01    [W:0.063 / U:0.164 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site