Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] idle: store the idle state index in the structrq
From: Daniel Lezcano
Date: Thu Jan 30 2014 - 12:25:33 EST
On 01/30/2014 05:35 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 05:27:54PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
struct cpuidle_state *state = &drv->states[rq->index];
And from the state, we have the following informations:
struct cpuidle_state {
[ ... ]
unsigned int exit_latency; /* in US */
int power_usage; /* in mW */
unsigned int target_residency; /* in US */
bool disabled; /* disabled on all CPUs */
[ ... ]
};
Right, but can we say that a higher index will save more power and have
a higher exit latency? Or is a driver free to have a random mapping from
idle_index to state?
If the driver does its own random mapping that will break the governor
logic. So yes, the states are ordered, the higher the index is, the more
you save power and the higher the exit latency is.
Also, we should probably create a pretty function to get that state,
just like you did in patch 1.
Yes, right.
IIRC, Alex Shi sent a patchset to improve the choosing of the idlest cpu and
the exit_latency was needed.
Right. However if we have a 'natural' order in the state array the index
itself might often be sufficient to find the least idle state, in this
specific case the absolute exit latency doesn't matter, all we want is
the lowest one.
Indeed. It could be simple as that. I feel we may need more informations
in the future but comparing the indexes could be a nice simple and
efficient solution.
Not dereferencing the state array saves hitting cold cachelines.
Yeah, always good to remind that. Should keep in mind for later.
Thanks for your comments.
-- Daniel
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org â Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/