Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

On 10/11/2016 02:13 πμ, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: >> On 08-11-16, 21:25, Stratos Karafotis wrote: >>> But this is the supposed behaviour of conservative governor. We want >>> the CPU to increase the frequency in

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

On 10/11/2016 02:13 πμ, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: >> On 08-11-16, 21:25, Stratos Karafotis wrote: >>> But this is the supposed behaviour of conservative governor. We want >>> the CPU to increase the frequency in steps. The patch just resets

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 08-11-16, 21:25, Stratos Karafotis wrote: >> But this is the supposed behaviour of conservative governor. We want >> the CPU to increase the frequency in steps. The patch just resets >> the frequency to a lower

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 08-11-16, 21:25, Stratos Karafotis wrote: >> But this is the supposed behaviour of conservative governor. We want >> the CPU to increase the frequency in steps. The patch just resets >> the frequency to a lower frequency in case of idle. >>

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

On 09/11/2016 07:55 πμ, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 08-11-16, 21:25, Stratos Karafotis wrote: >> But this is the supposed behaviour of conservative governor. We want >> the CPU to increase the frequency in steps. The patch just resets >> the frequency to a lower frequency in case of idle. >> >> For

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

On 09/11/2016 07:55 πμ, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 08-11-16, 21:25, Stratos Karafotis wrote: >> But this is the supposed behaviour of conservative governor. We want >> the CPU to increase the frequency in steps. The patch just resets >> the frequency to a lower frequency in case of idle. >> >> For

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

On 08-11-16, 21:25, Stratos Karafotis wrote: > But this is the supposed behaviour of conservative governor. We want > the CPU to increase the frequency in steps. The patch just resets > the frequency to a lower frequency in case of idle. > > For argument's sake, let's assume that the governor

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

On 08-11-16, 21:25, Stratos Karafotis wrote: > But this is the supposed behaviour of conservative governor. We want > the CPU to increase the frequency in steps. The patch just resets > the frequency to a lower frequency in case of idle. > > For argument's sake, let's assume that the governor

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

On 08/11/2016 10:32 πμ, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 8 November 2016 at 12:49, Stratos Karafotis wrote: >> I think we shouldn't. That's why the patch first decreases the frequency >> by n freq steps (where n the number of deferred periods). >> Then the normal processing takes

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

On 08/11/2016 10:32 πμ, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 8 November 2016 at 12:49, Stratos Karafotis wrote: >> I think we shouldn't. That's why the patch first decreases the frequency >> by n freq steps (where n the number of deferred periods). >> Then the normal processing takes place. > > The problem

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

On 8 November 2016 at 12:49, Stratos Karafotis wrote: > I think we shouldn't. That's why the patch first decreases the frequency > by n freq steps (where n the number of deferred periods). > Then the normal processing takes place. The problem that I see is that the new

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

On 8 November 2016 at 12:49, Stratos Karafotis wrote: > I think we shouldn't. That's why the patch first decreases the frequency > by n freq steps (where n the number of deferred periods). > Then the normal processing takes place. The problem that I see is that the new algorithm will reduce the

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

On 07-11-16, 19:27, Stratos Karafotis wrote: > Yes, it could be done only when we decrease frequency. But I thought that > maybe > this is against conservative governor principle. > > I initially observed this issue on a Snapdragon 808 using conservative on the > big cluster (A57). The CPU

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

On 07-11-16, 19:27, Stratos Karafotis wrote: > Yes, it could be done only when we decrease frequency. But I thought that > maybe > this is against conservative governor principle. > > I initially observed this issue on a Snapdragon 808 using conservative on the > big cluster (A57). The CPU

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

Hi, Thanks for reviewing. On 07/11/2016 08:12 πμ, Viresh Kumar wrote: > For the record, I have never got the original mail with this subject. I'm sorry for inconvenience. It seems that I had an issue on my mail server. > On 06-11-16, 11:19, Stratos Karafotis wrote: >> Conservative governor

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

Hi, Thanks for reviewing. On 07/11/2016 08:12 πμ, Viresh Kumar wrote: > For the record, I have never got the original mail with this subject. I'm sorry for inconvenience. It seems that I had an issue on my mail server. > On 06-11-16, 11:19, Stratos Karafotis wrote: >> Conservative governor

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

For the record, I have never got the original mail with this subject. On 06-11-16, 11:19, Stratos Karafotis wrote: > Conservative governor changes the CPU frequency in steps. > That means that if a CPU runs at max frequency, it will need several > sampling periods to return at min frequency when

Re: [Resend][PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster when the timer deferred

For the record, I have never got the original mail with this subject. On 06-11-16, 11:19, Stratos Karafotis wrote: > Conservative governor changes the CPU frequency in steps. > That means that if a CPU runs at max frequency, it will need several > sampling periods to return at min frequency when