On 08/20/2012 11:47 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote: > On 16 August 2012 07:03, Alex Shi <alex....@intel.com> wrote: >> On 08/16/2012 12:19 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 08:21:00PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote: >>> >>>> power aware scheduling), this proposal will adopt the >>>> sched_balance_policy concept and use 2 kind of policy: performance, power. >>> >>> Are there workloads in which "power" might provide more performance than >>> "performance"? If so, don't use these terms. >>> >> >> >> Power scheme should no chance has better performance in design. > > A side effect of packing small tasks on one core is that you always > use the core with the lowest C-state which will minimize the wake up > latency so you can sometime get better results than performance mode > which will try to use a other core in another cluster which will take > more time to wake up that waiting for the end of the current task. >
Sure. some scenario packing tasks into smaller domain will bring performance benefit. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
