On 04/10/2013 06:22 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 9 April 2013 22:26, Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr wrote:
On 04/05/2013 10:50 PM, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Hi Viresh,
On 04/04/2013 07:54 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Hi Stratos,
Yes, your results show some improvements
-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/base/regmap/regcache.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/base/regmap/regcache.c b/drivers/base/regmap/regcache.c
index d81f605..a469748 100644
--- a/drivers/base/regmap/regcache.c
+++ b/drivers/base/regmap
Hi Viresh,
On 04/04/2013 07:54 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Hi Stratos,
Yes, your results show some improvements. BUT if performance is the only thing
we were looking for, then we will never use ondemand governor but performance
governor.
I suspect this little increase in performance must
On 04/05/2013 10:50 PM, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Hi Viresh,
On 04/04/2013 07:54 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Hi Stratos,
Yes, your results show some improvements. BUT if performance is the only thing
we were looking for, then we will never use ondemand governor but performance
governor.
I suspect
’ was declared
here
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/md/dm-raid.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c
index 1d3fe1a..8041de8 100644
--- a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c
+++ b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c
@@ -380,7
On 02/22/2013 03:56 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 21 February 2013 23:09, Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr wrote:
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org
Hi Rafael,
In case you are interested in this patch I rebased
On 04/02/2013 04:50 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Do you have any numbers indicating that this actually makes things better?
Rafael
No, I don't.
The expected behaviour after this patch is to force max frequency few
sampling periods earlier.
The idea was to increase system responsiveness
On 04/03/2013 02:14 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, April 03, 2013 12:13:56 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 3 April 2013 12:01, stratosk strat...@semaphore.gr wrote:
I'm sorry, I don't understand.
The goal of this patch is not energy saving.
He probably misunderstood it...
The goal is
On 03/22/2013 01:54 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Applied to linux-pm.git/bleeding-edge and will be moved to linux-next if there
are no build problems in the bleeding-edge branch.
Thanks,
Rafael
Hi Rafael,
I just noticed a regression with this patch with the calculation of wall time
in
With commit 8755a8ae31ba213db196324011a0da2a85807f25 the wall in
get_cpu_idle_time is not calculated, when we use ondemand with
io_is_busy = 1, preventing the CPU to increase to max frequency.
Properly, calculate wall time when we use io_is_busy.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat
---
Use an inline function to evaluate freq_target to avoid duplicate code.
Also, define a macro for the default frequency step.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 28
1 file
On 6 March 2013 22:15, Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr wrote:
Use an inline function to evaluate freq_target to avoid duplicate code.
Also, define a macro for the default frequency step.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq
sampling_down_factor tunable is unused since commit
8e677ce83bf41ba9c74e5b6d9ee60b07d4e5ed93 (4 years ago).
This patch restores the original functionality.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 6 ++
1 file changed, 6 insertions
Hi Viresh,
On 03/05/2013 02:23 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: Interesting. Because it was
removed earlier and no body complained :)
I got following from Documentation:
sampling_down_factor: this parameter controls the rate at which the
kernel makes a decision on when to decrease the frequency
On 03/05/2013 09:34 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 5 March 2013 13:22, Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr wrote:
I misread it here when i looked at this mail for the first time. :)
I strongly believe that we need a full stop (.) before Every sampling_rate,
otherwise it looks like we check
Hi David,
On 03/05/2013 04:21 PM, David C Niemi wrote:
I should clarify -- I wrote the sampling_down_factor in the *ondemand*
governor. I chose the name of the parameter based on the vaguely similar
parameter in the conservative governor, but the documentation that was
referenced (about it
sampling_down_factor tunable is unused since commit
8e677ce83bf41ba9c74e5b6d9ee60b07d4e5ed93 (4 years ago).
This patch restores the original functionality and documents the
tunable.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
Documentation/cpu-freq/governors.txt | 6
When we evaluate the CPU load for frequency decrease we have to compare
the load against down_threshold. There is no need to subtract 10 points
from down_threshold.
Instead, we have to use the default down_threshold or user's selection
unmodified.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat
Use an inline function to evaluate freq_target to avoid duplicate code.
Also, define a macro for the default frequency step and fix the
calculation of freq_target when the max freq is less that 100.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq
Use an inline function to evaluate freq_target to avoid duplicate code.
Also, define a macro for the default frequency step.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 27 +++
1 file changed, 15 insertions
On 03/06/2013 09:35 PM, David C Niemi wrote:
The 10 sounds like an attempt to add some hysteresis to the up/down
decisionmaking. If you take it out, you should make sure you don't get into
situations where you're continually switching rapidly between two
frequencies. (In the ondemand
Fix some typos in comments.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c | 12 ++--
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
index 09b27ae
Fix a couple of typos in comments.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
index
This patch removes the unused variable 'c' in mwait_play_dead and fixes
the following warning:
arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c: In function ‘mwait_play_dead’:
arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c:1370:22: warning:
unused variable ‘c’ [-Wunused-variable]
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
updated.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h | 2 +-
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c | 16 ++--
2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h
b/drivers/cpufreq
This patch restructures code for better readability and easier
maintenance.
Also introduces lowmemorykiller.h header file.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c | 162 ++
drivers/staging/android
On 02/01/2013 12:25 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
Given that no one is working on it, why does it need to be maintained
easier? :)
Thanks for your immediate response.
I was thinking to work on this driver. Is it going to be obsolete or
something?
Why create a .h file? Who needs it? Only
This patch fixes the following compiler warning of uninitialized
variable:
drivers/base/regmap/regmap-debugfs.c: In function ‘regmap_read_debugfs’:
drivers/base/regmap/regmap-debugfs.c:180:9: warning: ‘ret’ may be used
uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
Signed-off-by: Stratos
. We use a parameter in
function get_cpu_idle_time to distinguish when the iowait time will be
added to idle time or not, without the need of keeping the prev_io_wait.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 2 +-
drivers/cpufreq
use a parameter in
function get_cpu_idle_time to distinguish when the iowait time will be
added to idle time or not, without the need of keeping the prev_io_wait.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 2 +-
drivers/cpufreq
Fix the following build warnings
sound/pci/hda/patch_sigmatel.c: In function ‘stac92hd71bxx_fixup_hp’:
sound/pci/hda/patch_sigmatel.c:2434:24: warning: unused variable ‘spec’
[-Wunused-variable]
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
sound/pci/hda/patch_sigmatel.c | 14
:1752:6: note: ‘vlan’ was declared here
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx4/qp.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx4/qp.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx4/qp.c
index 19e0637..37829b6 100644
Fix the following compiler warning (also a checkpatch error):
net/ipv6/xfrm6_mode_tunnel.c: In function ‘xfrm6_mode_tunnel_input’:
net/ipv6/xfrm6_mode_tunnel.c:72:2: warning: suggest parentheses around
assignment used as truth value [-Wparentheses]
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat
: controls the final up_threshold
- grad_up_threshold: over this gradient of load we will decrease
up_threshold by early_differential.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c | 1 +
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h | 4
) and we increase frequency immediately.
New tuners are introduced:
- early_demand: to enable this functionality (disabled by default).
- grad_up_threshold: over this gradient of load we will increase
frequency immediately.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq
:
- early_demand: to enable this functionality (disabled by default).
- grad_up_threshold: over this gradient of load we will increase
frequency immediately.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c | 1 +
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h
-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 4
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c | 3 ---
2 files changed, 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
index 7f67a75..f62d822 100644
- 'Governer' should be 'Governor'
- 'S' is used for Siemens (electrical conductance) in SI units.
Use small 's' for seconds.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c | 2 +-
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h | 12 ++--
2 files
On 08/27/2013 08:57 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 27 August 2013 00:07, Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr wrote:
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 4
Get rid of few more checks..
/* if we are already at full speed then break out early */
if (dbs_info-requested_freq
On 08/27/2013 07:07 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 27 August 2013 21:16, Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr wrote:
I think we should keep these checks because:
1) They shorten the execution code (there is no unnecessary call of
__cpufreq_driver_target)
I don't really count this one
On 08/18/2013 08:04 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Sorry for double post. forgot to cc cpufreq maintainers.
On 08/16, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
To fix this, lets only update the sleeptime stats locally when the CPU
exits from idle.
I am in no position to ack the changes in this area, but I
On 08/22/2013 10:59 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Thu, 22 Aug 2013 00:42:41 +0300,
Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Hi,
I get the following oops during boot when build with
CONFIG_SND_DYNAMIC_MINORS
not set (3.11-rc6).
The issue is vanished building the kernel with CONFIG_SND_DYNAMIC_MINORS=y
On 08/23/2013 12:23 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Thu, 22 Aug 2013 19:03:44 +0300,
Stratos Karafotis wrote:
On 08/22/2013 10:59 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Thu, 22 Aug 2013 00:42:41 +0300,
Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Hi,
I get the following oops during boot when build
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 6:55 AM, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 8 November 2013 00:36, Stratos Karafotis skarafo...@gmail.com wrote:
I think the existing code already checks if the requested_freq is greater
than policy-max in __cpufreq_driver_target.
Yes it does
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 8 November 2013 23:13, Stratos Karafotis skarafo...@gmail.com wrote:
Please let me rephrase my previous post. In some circumstances (depending
on freq_step and freq_table values) CPU frequency will never reach
Remove 3 sets of unnecessary braces
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 11 ---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index 1eafd8c..ca3c01f 100644
Fix 2 checkpatch errors about using assignment in if condition,
1 checkpatch error about a required space after comma
and 3 warnings about line over 80 characters.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 23 ---
1 file changed
On 20/03/2014 12:45 πμ, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, March 19, 2014 11:33:00 PM Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Remove 3 sets of unnecessary braces
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 11 ---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7
On 06/05/2013 11:35 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, June 05, 2013 08:13:26 PM Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Hi Borislav,
On 06/05/2013 07:17 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 07:01:25PM +0300, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Ondemand calculates load in terms of frequency
On 06/07/2013 11:57 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, June 07, 2013 10:14:34 PM Stratos Karafotis wrote:
On 06/05/2013 11:35 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, June 05, 2013 08:13:26 PM Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Hi Borislav,
On 06/05/2013 07:17 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Wed
consumption.
I will also send the results running the test as you said.
Thanks again,
Stratos
Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl wrote:
On Saturday, June 08, 2013 12:56:00 PM Stratos Karafotis wrote:
On 06/07/2013 11:57 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, June 07, 2013 10:14:34 PM Stratos
On 06/08/2013 05:05 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Saturday, June 08, 2013 03:34:29 PM Stratos Karafotis wrote:
I also did the test with the way you mentioned. But I thought to run
turbostat for 100 sec as I did with powertop.
Ah, OK.
Actually benchmark lasts about 96 secs.
I think
On 06/09/2013 07:26 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 12:18:09AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
The average power drawn by the package is slightly higher with the
patchset applied (27.66 W vs 27.25 W), but since the time needed to
complete the workload with the patchset
On 06/09/2013 11:58 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Well, this means that your changes may hurt performance if the load comes and
goes in spikes, which is not so good. The fact that they cause less energy to
be used at the same time kind of balance that, though. [After all, we're
talking about
Hi Rafael,
On 06/11/2013 02:24 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, June 11, 2013 12:57:26 AM Stratos Karafotis wrote:
On 06/09/2013 11:58 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Well, this means that your changes may hurt performance if the load comes
and
goes in spikes, which is not so good
On 06/14/2013 12:40 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 12:22:18AM +0300, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Please let me share some more test results using aim9 benchmark suite:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AnMfNYUV1k0ddDdGdlJyUHpqT2xGY1lBOEt2UEVnNlEusp=sharing
Each
Hi,
On 06/14/2013 03:55 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, June 14, 2013 02:44:01 PM Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 02:46:38PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
OK, so here's a deal. After 3.10-rc1 goes out, I'll put this into
linux-next
Yeah, you mean 3.11-rc1 here...
On 06/04/2013 08:19 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 4 June 2013 01:18, Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr wrote:
Calculation of frequency target in ondemand governor changed and it is
s/frequency target/target frequency
I will change it also in 3/3 that I use the same.
independent from
On 06/03/2013 11:38 PM, David C Niemi wrote:
Interesting analysis; I just got back from vacation and have not had a chance
to comment until now.
I like Stratos' general idea of making the decision to upshift or downshift
independent of current frequency, as it makes thinks simpler and
I think you are right. I will reorder 2/3 and 3/3 with the change you suggested.
Thanks,
Stratos
Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 4 June 2013 20:36, Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr wrote:
On 06/04/2013 08:19 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Should this be done in 3/3 ?
acpi
Calculation of target frequency in ondemand governor changed and it is
independent from measured average frequency.
Remove unused__cpufreq_driver_getavg function and getavg member from
cpufreq_driver struct.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
Changes since v2:
- Reorder patches 2/3 and 3/3
- Fix typos in patch changelog
Changes since v1:
- Use policy-cpuinfo.max_freq in the calculation formula
of target frequency instead of policy-max
- Split the patch into 3 parts
Stratos Karafotis (3
Calculation of target frequency in ondemand governor changed and it is
independent from measured average frequency.
Remove unused APERF/MPERF support.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 29 ---
drivers/cpufreq
were used less by ~9%
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c | 10 +-
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h | 1 -
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c | 39 +++---
3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 42
Hi Borislav,
On 06/05/2013 07:17 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 07:01:25PM +0300, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Ondemand calculates load in terms of frequency and increases it only
if the load_freq is greater than up_threshold multiplied by current
or average frequency
Fix the following compiler warning:
fs/ext4/inode.c: In function ‘ext4_da_writepages’:
fs/ext4/inode.c:2212:6: warning: ‘err’ may be used uninitialized in this
function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
fs/ext4/inode.c:2155:6: note: ‘err’ was declared here
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat
Hi Rafael,
I will try to provide the requested info (although, I'm not sure how to measure
total energy :) )
Thanks,
Stratos
Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl wrote:
On Wednesday, June 05, 2013 08:13:26 PM Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Hi Borislav,
On 06/05/2013 07:17 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote
Thanks Viresh. I think I couldn't explain this in better way.
Also thanks for acknowledgment!
Stratos
Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 6 June 2013 15:31, Borislav Petkov b...@suse.de wrote:
Hold on, you say above easily saturate minimum frequency and lead the
CPU to max. I read
, please.
Thanks.
On 06/06/2013 04:15 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: Please do not top-post.
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 03:54:20PM +0300, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
I will try to provide the requested info (although, I'm not sure how
to measure total energy :) )
tools/power/x86/turbostat looks like
On 06/06/2013 08:11 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 07:46:17PM +0300, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Apologies for top-posting. I was able to send email only from my phone.
Thanks for you hint about turbostat.
As you most probably understood, I'm individual amateur kernel
On 05/28/2013 11:54 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 08:03:19 PM Stratos Karafotis wrote:
I mean any value of freq table. Please let me know if you want me to rephrase
it in description.
Yes, it would be nice to be more precise.
OK sure, I will add a more precise
On 05/30/2013 01:29 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 06:15:56 PM Stratos Karafotis wrote:
On 05/28/2013 11:54 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 08:03:19 PM Stratos Karafotis wrote:
I mean any value of freq table. Please let me know if you want me
used less by ~9%
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 29 --
drivers/cpufreq/Makefile | 2 +-
drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c | 5
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 21
drivers
On 05/31/2013 11:51 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
---
arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 29 --
drivers/cpufreq/Makefile | 2 +-
drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c | 5
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 21
On 06/01/2013 03:27 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, May 31, 2013 07:33:06 PM Stratos Karafotis wrote:
On 05/31/2013 11:51 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
---
arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 29 --
drivers/cpufreq/Makefile | 2 +-
drivers/cpufreq
On 06/01/2013 05:56 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 31 May 2013 22:03, Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr wrote:
On 05/31/2013 11:51 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
I believe you should have removed other users of getavg() in a separate
patch and also cc'd relevant people so that you can some review
On 06/03/2013 02:24 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 3 June 2013 16:27, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl wrote:
The question is if we want policy-max to re-scale them effectively (i.e. to
change weights so that the maximum load maps to the highest frequency
available
at the moment) or if we want
were used less by ~9%
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c | 10 +-
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h | 1 -
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c | 39 +++---
3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 42
Changes since v1:
Use policy-cpuinfo.max_freq in the calculation formula
of target frequency instead of policy-max
Split the patch into 3 parts
Stratos Karafotis (3):
cpufreq: ondemand: Change the calculation of target frequency
cpufreq: Remove unused function
Calculation of frequency target in ondemand governor changed and it is
independent from measured average frequency.
Remove unused__cpufreq_driver_getavg function and getavg member from
cpufreq_driver struct. Also, remove the callback getavg in
acpi_cpufreq_driver.
Signed-off-by: Stratos
Calculation of frequency target in ondemand governor changed and it is
independent from measured average frequency.
Remove unused APERF/MPERF support.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 29 ---
drivers/cpufreq
On 04/09/2013 07:56 PM, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
On 04/05/2013 10:50 PM, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Hi Viresh,
On 04/04/2013 07:54 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Hi Stratos,
Yes, your results show some improvements. BUT if performance is the
only thing
we were looking for, then we will never use
are
attached with and without this patch. cpufreq_stats (time_in_state) are
also included. Tested on Intel i7-3770 CPU @ 3.40GH and on
Quad core 1500 MHz Krait.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c | 10 +-
drivers/cpufreq
1.5% to performance. cpufreq_stats (time_in_state) shows
that middle frequencies are used more, with this patch. Highest
and lowest frequencies were used less by ~9%
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c | 10 +-
drivers/cpufreq
After commit dfa5bb622555d9da0df21b50f46ebdeef390041b
cpufreq: ondemand: Change the calculation of target frequency,
this return statement is no longer needed.
Reported-by: Henrik Nilsson karl.henrik.nils...@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq
On 11/01/2013 02:18 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, November 01, 2013 12:09:16 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 31 October 2013 23:57, Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr wrote:
After commit dfa5bb622555d9da0df21b50f46ebdeef390041b
cpufreq: ondemand: Change the calculation of target
calculation
if tracing is on).
Thanks!
Stratos Karafotis (7):
cpufreq: intel_pstate: Remove duplicate CPU ID check
cpufreq: intel_pstate: Avoid duplicate call of
intel_pstate_get_scaled_busy
cpufreq: intel_pstate: Add debugfs file stats
cpufreq: intel_pstate: Simplify code
Also put them in alphabetical order.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 17 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
index 26a0262
Store busy_scaled value to avoid to duplicate call of
intel_pstate_get_scaled_busy on every sampling interval.
Also, rename the function to intel_pstate_calc_scaled_busy.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 12 ++--
1 file changed
Since we never remove sysfs entry, we can make the intel_pstate_kobject
local.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq
Remove unnecessary blank lines.
Remove unnecessary parentheses.
Remove unnecessary braces.
Put the code in one line where possible.
Add blank lines after variable declarations.
Alignment to open parenthesis.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq
Simplify the code by removing the inline functions
pstate_increase and pstate_decrease and use directly the
intel_pstate_set_pstate.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 26 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 23
We check the CPU ID during driver init. There is no need
to do it again per logical CPU initialization.
So, remove the duplicate check.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 6 --
1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers
39 85446 3803
...
The file can be used for debugging but also for monitoring
various system workloads.
Also, make the debugfs_parent local as we never remove
the driver's debugfs files.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 80
On 10/06/2014 12:07 πμ, David Rientjes wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jun 2014, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Since we never remove sysfs entry, we can make the intel_pstate_kobject
local.
For even more savings, this function and
intel_pstate_debug_expose_params() can be annotated with __init and freed
Hi Rafael,
On 07/05/2014 04:13 μμ, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, May 07, 2014 10:53:16 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 6 May 2014 23:25, Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr wrote:
My bad. I'm sorry for this. :(
Rafael,
A solution could be to make cpufreq_next_valid an inline function
`clk_rate_table_find':
clkdev.c:(.text+0xcf820): undefined reference to `cpufreq_next_valid'
make[3]: *** [vmlinux] Error 1
Fix this making cpufreq_next_valid function inline and move it to
cpufreq.h.
Reported-by: Geert Uytterhoeven ge...@linux-m68k.org
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
On 29/04/2014 11:28 μμ, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Many drivers keep frequencies in frequency table in ascending
or descending order. When governor tries to change to policy-min
or policy-max respectively then the cpufreq_frequency_table_target
could return on first iteration. This will save
Hi Dirk,
On 08/05/2014 11:52 μμ, Dirk Brandewie wrote:
On 05/05/2014 04:57 PM, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
Currently the driver calculates the next pstate proportional to
core_busy factor, scaled by the ratio max_pstate / current_pstate.
Using the scaled load (core_busy) to calculate the next
of a line
Also, define the pr_fmt macro instead of PFX for the module name.
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis strat...@semaphore.gr
---
Changes v1 - v2
- Use pr_err_once instead of printk_once
- Change missing_pss_msg to macro (because pr_err_once
doesn't compile otherwise
1 - 100 of 446 matches
Mail list logo
