Re: [RFC] maximum latency tracking infrastructure (version 2)

[Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>]

Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > The patch below adds infrastructure to track "maximum allowable 
> > latency" for
> > power saving policies.
>
> Very interesting approach. I wonder if it could be used to cover
> another problematic source of latencies as well: asynchronous SMIs.
> They quickly cause delays reaching from a few 100 us up to
> milliseconds.
>
> Hard-RT extension like Xenomai work around this on several Intel
> chipsets by disabling SMI unconditionally 


I would consider that a mistake. SMI's are used to do things like emergency thermal protections etc etc.
Disabling them unconditionally is going to risk you your hardware.

> I guess an interface to let also applications / the sysadmin specifiy
> a latency constraint would be useful as well. sysfs?

I thought about this a lot but decided against. There are already ways to do things like disable specific C states etc,
and if we expose this it'll mostly get abused by certain desktop applications who have no idea what they are doing ;=(
What makes anyone think that userspace could make a better decision than the drivers?
Video / Audio playback are not good examples since these both already would work automatically correct with only in-kernel
infrastructure. Hard-RT systems are also not a good example since those should use the existing boot parameters. I couldn't
come up with other scenarios, and until we have a good one I'm against exposing crap to sysfs "just because we can".
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/