| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
The previous revert of 0c07ee38c9d4eb081758f5ad14bbffa7197e1aec left
out the mwait disable condition for AMD family 10H/11H CPUs.
Andreas Herrman said:
It depends on the CPU. For AMD CPUs that support MWAIT this is wrong.
Family 0x10 and 0x11 CPUs will enter C1 on HLT. Powersavings then
depend on a clock divisor and current Pstate of the core.
If all cores of a processor are in halt state (C1) the processor can
enter the C1E (C1 enhanced) state. If mwait is used this will never
happen.
Thus HLT saves more power than MWAIT here.
It might be best to switch off the mwait flag for these AMD CPU
families like it was introduced with commit
f039b754714a422959027cb18bb33760eb8153f0 (x86: Don't use MWAIT on AMD
Family 10)
Re-add the AMD families 10H/11H check and disable the mwait usage for
those.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
|
|
Vegard Nossum reports:
| powertop shows between 200-400 wakeups/second with the description
| "<kernel IPI>: Rescheduling interrupts" when all processors have load (e.g.
| I need to run two busy-loops on my 2-CPU system for this to show up).
|
| The bisect resulted in this commit:
|
| commit 0c07ee38c9d4eb081758f5ad14bbffa7197e1aec
| Date: Wed Jan 30 13:33:16 2008 +0100
|
| x86: use the correct cpuid method to detect MWAIT support for C states
remove the functional effects of this patch and make mwait unconditional.
A future patch will turn off mwait on specific CPUs where that causes
power to be wasted.
Bisected-by: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
|
|
OK, so 25-mm1 gave a lockdep error which made me look into this.
The first thing that I noticed was the horrible mess; the second thing I
saw was hacks like: 71e93d15612c61c2e26a169567becf088e71b8ff
The problem is that arch idle routines are somewhat inconsitent with
their IRQ state handling and instead of fixing _that_, we go paper over
the problem.
So the thing I've tried to do is set a standard for idle routines and
fix them all up to adhere to that. So the rules are:
idle routines are entered with IRQs disabled
idle routines will exit with IRQs enabled
Nearly all already did this in one form or another.
Merge the 32 and 64 bit bits so they no longer have different bugs.
As for the actual lockdep warning; __sti_mwait() did a plainly un-annotated
irq-enable.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Tested-by: Bob Copeland <me@bobcopeland.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
|
|
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
|
|
Only allocate the FPU area when the application actually uses FPU, i.e., in the
first lazy FPU trap. This could save memory for non-fpu using apps.
for example: on my system after boot, there are around 300 processes, with
only 17 using FPU.
Signed-off-by: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
|
|
Split the FPU save area from the task struct. This allows easy migration
of FPU context, and it's generally cleaner. It also allows the following
two optimizations:
1) only allocate when the application actually uses FPU, so in the first
lazy FPU trap. This could save memory for non-fpu using apps. Next patch
does this lazy allocation.
2) allocate the right size for the actual cpu rather than 512 bytes always.
Patches enabling xsave/xrstor support (coming shortly) will take advantage
of this.
Signed-off-by: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
|
