From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F193083CC1; Thu, 5 Sep 2024 12:31:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725539505; cv=none; b=I4UUA7W6T3TeG2AH8n6TzQcHCcynog0IrJ5QYxOKxOHU8rFqpNflN3IS1ipWr7Di/GSYbKVHcIOpWHbdLv41KhV9brbMXxgj/sQKNtgHwPQPnL8zicl2L8+PEwjO982MBnf86R8lqy8V+sQ+CLyL9y1EKVznbVTo8TWq7ECDync= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725539505; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Ys+n47upRV8gJ7cBIJy241XGKNyjCb8RzCKOOkMZvPY=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=SjkGQL/kUwtYVfcq2AUkSvoKWLBX/Q45+CJY1N3g3BNBn3Xrg+t9fOckDLdKU3/R5O/V22aGZ3JJEoFeyOWzOJIPZtfOCZMoLyzLPku8+JYhYR4LzcJu8Gb2p28jqUMTKfXfXZRYi1uvXIiwtG6vPJHkGUBw9yZoUonn4uV/1pA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A67E1FEC; Thu, 5 Sep 2024 05:32:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.32.66] (e127648.arm.com [10.1.32.66]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 873123F73B; Thu, 5 Sep 2024 05:31:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <16591e9c-1bfa-4fd0-811a-94ff4f032597@arm.com> Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 13:31:36 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [RFT RFC PATCH 0/8] cpufreq: cpuidle: Remove iowait behaviour To: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rafael@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com, mingo@redhat.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, vschneid@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, Johannes.Thumshirn@wdc.com, adrian.hunter@intel.com, ulf.hansson@linaro.org, bvanassche@acm.org, andres@anarazel.de, asml.silence@gmail.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, io-uring@vger.kernel.org, qyousef@layalina.io, dsmythies@telus.net, axboe@kernel.dk References: <20240905092645.2885200-1-christian.loehle@arm.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Christian Loehle In-Reply-To: <20240905092645.2885200-1-christian.loehle@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 9/5/24 10:26, Christian Loehle wrote: > I wanted to share my current status after working on the schedutil > iowait boost issue for a while now. This is what I consider the best > solution, happy for anyone to share thoughts and test results (it's > simply impossible to cover them all). > I'm hoping to remove some (bad) heuristics that have been in the kernel > for a long time and are seemingly impossible to evolve. Since the > introduction of these heuristics IO workloads have changed and those > heuristics can be removed while only really affecting synthetic > benchmarks. Lots of related discussion is also here: [PATCHSET v4 0/4] Split iowait into two states https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240416121526.67022-1-axboe@kernel.dk/ [PATCHSET v6 0/4] Split iowait into two states https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240819154259.215504-1-axboe@kernel.dk/