Hi Will,
On 2017-07-31 06:13, Will Deacon wrote:
Hi Vikram,
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 12:09:38PM -0700, Vikram Mulukutla wrote:
On 2017-07-28 02:28, Will Deacon wrote:
>On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 06:10:34PM -0700, Vikram Mulukutla wrote:
>
This does seem to help. Here's some data after 5 runs with and without
the
patch.
Blimey, that does seem to make a difference. Shame it's so ugly! Would
you
be able to experiment with other values for CPU_RELAX_WFE_THRESHOLD? I
had
it set to 10000 in the diff I posted, but that might be higher than
optimal.
It would be interested to see if it correlates with num_possible_cpus()
for the highly contended case.
Will
Sorry for the late response - I should hopefully have some more data
with
different thresholds before the week is finished or on Monday.
Thanks,
Vikram
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project