Re: [RFC/RFT][PATCH v2 0/6] sched/cpuidle: Idle loop rework

[Mike Galbraith]

On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 12:10 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 11:31 AM, Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>                               1     2     3
> > 4.16.0.g1b88acc-master     6.95  7.03  6.91 (virgin)
> > 4.16.0.g1b88acc-master     7.20  7.25  7.26 (+v2)
> > 4.16.0.g1b88acc-master     6.90  7.06  6.95 (+local)
> >
> > Why would v2 charge the light firefox load a small but consistent fee?
> 
> Two effects may come into play here I think.
> 
> One is that allowing the tick to run biases the menu governor's
> predictions towards the lower end, so we may use shallow states more
> as a result then (Peter was talking about that).

Hm, I'd expect that to show up in +local as well then, as it keeps the
tick running when avg_idle < sched_migration_cost (convenient magic
number), but the firefox load runs at the same wattage as virgin.  I'm
also doing this...

--- a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
+++ b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
@@ -335,7 +335,7 @@ static int menu_select(struct cpuidle_dr
                 * C1's exit latency exceeds the user configured limit.
                 */
                polling_threshold = max_t(unsigned int, 20, s->target_residency);
-               if (data->next_timer_us > polling_threshold &&
+               if (expected_interval > polling_threshold &&
                    latency_req > s->exit_latency && !s->disabled &&
                    !dev->states_usage[1].disable)
                        first_idx = 1;

...to help out high frequency cross core throughput, but the firefox
load apparently doesn't tickle that, as significant polling would
surely show in the wattage.

	-Mike