On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 11:04:16AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hoi Peter, > > On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 10:05 AM Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 11:39:17AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote: > > > I wonder whether the right thing to do here is somehow scaling the > > > threshold > > > according to the relative processing power. It's difficult to come up > > > with a > > > threshold which works well across the latest & fastest and really tiny > > > CPUs. > > > I'll think about it some more but if you have some ideas, please feel free > > > to suggest. > > > > We could scale by BogoMIPS I suppose, it's a bogus measurement, as per > > the name, but it does have some relation to how fast the machine is. > > That's gonna fail miserably on e.g. ARM and RISC-V, where BogoMIPS > depends on some timer frequency. > > R-Car M2-W with 1.5 GHz Cortex-A15: 40.00 BogoMIPS > R-Car V4H with 1.8 GHz Cortex-A76: 33.33 BogoMIPS > > while the real slow 48 MHz VexRiscV gets 128 BogoMIPS.
Hehe, OK, really bogus then. Lets file this idea in the bit-bucket then.
