Re: [PATCH] tick/powerclamp: Remove tick_nohz_idle abuse

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Thu, 18 Dec 2014, Jacob Pan wrote:
> OK I agree, also as I mentioned earlier, Peter already has a patch for
> consolidated idle loop and remove tick_nohz_idle_enter/exit call from
> powerclamp driver. I have been working on a few tweaks to maintain the
> functionality and efficiency with the consolidated idle loop.
> We can apply the patches on top of yours.

No. This is equally wrong as I pointed out before. The 'unified' idle
loop is still fake and just pretending to be idle.

If simple standard interfaces like cpu_idle() are not working from
idle code anymore then this simply stinks. And that's what any fake
idle thread will do.

The whole approach is wrong. Implement a sched fair throttler and you
can avoid the whoile trainwreck.
 
> > 1. Queue a deferable periodic timer whose handler checks if idle
> > needs to be injected. If so, it sets rq->need_throttle for the cpu.
> > If its already in the fake idle period, it clears rq->need_throttle
> > and sets need_resched.
> > 
> The key to powerclamp driver is to achieve package level idle
> states, which implies synchronized idle injection. From
> power/performance standpoint, only package level idle states is worth
> injection.

Then use a synchronized non deferrable timer on all cpus. It's simple
enough.
 
Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/