On Monday 19 April 2010 15:43:25 Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 10:29:47 +0200
> Éric Piel <eric.piel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > The problem and fix are both verified with the "perf timechar" tool.
> > Hi,
> > I don't doubt that keeping the cpu full frequency during IO can
> > improve some specific workloads, however in your log message you
> > don't explain how much we are loosing.
>
> first of all, it's so bad that people will just turn the whole power
> management off... at which point fixing the really bad bug is actually
> quite a win
Not sure you fix a bug, I expect this was done on purpose.
The ondemand governor disadvantages processes with alternating short CPU
load peaks and idle sequences.
IO bound processes typically show up with such a behavior.
But I follow Eric and agree that if it costs that much, changing
above sounds sane.
Still, I could imagine some people might want to not raise freq on IO bound
process activity, therefore this should get another ondemand param, similar
to ignore_nice_load.
Thomas
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
