Commit efddfd90 authored by Rik van Riel's avatar Rik van Riel Committed by Rafael J. Wysocki

cpuidle,menu: smooth out measured_us calculation

The cpuidle state tables contain the maximum exit latency for each
cpuidle state. On x86, that is the exit latency for when the entire
package goes into that same idle state.

However, a lot of the time we only go into the core idle state,
not the package idle state. This means we see a much smaller exit
latency.

We have no way to detect whether we went into the core or package
idle state while idle, and that is ok.

However, the current menu_update logic does have the potential to
trip up the repeating pattern detection in get_typical_interval.
If the system is experiencing an exit latency near the idle state's
exit latency, some of the samples will have exit_us subtracted,
while others will not. This turns a repeating pattern into mush,
potentially breaking get_typical_interval.

Furthermore, for smaller sleep intervals, we know the chance that
all the cores in the package went to the same idle state are fairly
small. Dividing the measured_us by two, instead of subtracting the
full exit latency when hitting a small measured_us, will reduce the
error.
Signed-off-by: default avatarRik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Acked-by: default avatarArjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
parent a9ceb78b
......@@ -404,8 +404,10 @@ static void menu_update(struct cpuidle_driver *drv, struct cpuidle_device *dev)
measured_us = cpuidle_get_last_residency(dev);
/* Deduct exit latency */
if (measured_us > target->exit_latency)
if (measured_us > 2 * target->exit_latency)
measured_us -= target->exit_latency;
else
measured_us /= 2;
/* Make sure our coefficients do not exceed unity */
if (measured_us > data->next_timer_us)
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment