On Thursday, October 20, 2016 04:20:44 PM Sedat Dilek wrote: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thursday, October 20, 2016 09:41:34 AM Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 06:59:35 PM Jörg Otte wrote: > >> >> 2016-10-19 17:29 GMT+02:00 Linus Torvalds > >> >> <[email protected]>: > >> >> > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 4:07 AM, Jörg Otte <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Additional info: I usally use schedutil governor. > >> >> >> If I switch to performance governor problems go away. > >> >> >> Maybe a cpufreq problem? > >> >> > > >> >> > Oh, I completely misread the original bug report, and then didn't read > >> >> > your confirmation email right. > >> >> > > >> >> > I thought you had a slower build of the different kernels (when > >> >> > building on the same kernel), and that the _build_ itself had slowed > >> >> > down for some reason. But you're actually saying that doing the _same_ > >> >> > build actually takes longer when running on 4.9-rc1. > >> >> > >> >> Exactly! > >> >> > >> >> Btw: ondemand governor is also good. > >> >> > >> >> > There are a few small cpufreq changes there in between commit > >> >> > 29fbff8698fc (that you reported was fine - please tell me I got _that_ > >> >> > right, at least?) and 4.9-rc1. > >> >> > >> >> Perfect! That's what I mean. > >> >> > >> >> > Adding Rafael to the cc. > >> >> > > >> >> > That said, none of them look all that likely to me. It *would* be good > >> >> > if you could bisect it a bit (perhaps not fully, but a couple of > >> >> > bisection steps to narrow down what area it is). > >> >> > >> >> I try that tomorrow. > >> > > >> > Well, please try commit ef98988ba369 (Merge tag 'pm-extra-4.9-rc1' of > >> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm) which is > >> > the > >> > merge introducing the late cpufreq changes. If the issue is there, > >> > please > >> > try to revert commit 899bb6642f2a (cpufreq: skip invalid entries when > >> > searching > >> > the frequency) which is the only cpufreq one that may matter for the > >> > schedutil > >> > governor (and I have one fix for that commit queued up already). > >> > > >> > >> Is "cpufreq: fix overflow in cpufreq_table_find_index_dl()" the fix > >> you are speaking of? > >> > >> Fixes: 899bb6642f2a (cpufreq: skip invalid entries when searching the > >> frequency) > > > > Yes. > > > >> If yes, can you add a hint in the commit message describing the impact > >> like here a slow-down of building a linux-kernel. > >> With a reference to this ML-thread? > > > > I will if that turns out to be the case. > > > > I have tried the revert and the patch from Sergey Senozhatsk pending > in linux-pm.git#linux-next. > Both fixes the issue for me.
OK, thanks for the confirmation! > Feel free to give appropriate credits and many thanks to Jörg. > > I tried 'make -j3' in my last build and it was approx. 5mins faster in > my customized setup. > Will switch back to 2 parallel-make-jobs - it's safer for me. > > Can you explain why this issue was not seen when building under Linux v4.8.x? > [1] says... > Cc: 4.8+ <[email protected]> # 4.8+ The commit in question might not make it into 4.8.y yet. Thanks, Rafael
