Re: [PATCH] intel_pstate: Update cpu_frequency tracepoint every time
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Sat Jul 23 2016 - 08:36:50 EST
On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 08:14:53 PM Doug Smythies wrote:
> On 2016.07.19 15:10 Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> > On Tue, 2016-07-19 at 15:10 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> Currently, intel_pstate only updates the cpu_frequency tracepoint
> >> if the new P-state to set is different from the current one, but
> >> that causes powertop to report 100% idle on an 100% loaded system
> >> sometimes.
> >> Prevent that from happening by updating the cpu_frequency tracepoint
> >> every time intel_pstate_update_pstate() is called.
> >> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Acked-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>-
> Shouldn't this patch refer to:
> commit fdfdb2b1301670a69195ba1e5666df4a7f02eb46
> Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri Mar 18 23:20:02 2016 +0100
> intel_pstate: Do not call wrmsrl_on_cpu() with disabled interrupts
> which is the patch that introduced the regression?
The logic changed by the $subject patch was there before the above commit,
so I don't think the issue at hand really is a regression introduced by it