On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 12:29 AM, Pandruvada, Srinivas
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, 2016-02-18 at 20:43 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

quoted

Hi Mel,

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 12:11 PM, Mel Gorman
[off-list ref] wrote:

[cut]

quoted

Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <redacted>
---
 drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c

b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
index cd83d477e32d..54250084174a 100644

--- a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c

@@ -999,7 +999,7 @@ static inline int32_t

get_target_pstate_use_performance(struct cpudata *cpu)
        sample_time = pid_params.sample_rate_ms  * USEC_PER_MSEC;
        duration_us = ktime_us_delta(cpu->sample.time,
                                     cpu->last_sample_time);
-       if (duration_us > sample_time * 3) {
+       if (duration_us > sample_time * 12) {
                sample_ratio = div_fp(int_tofp(sample_time),
                                      int_tofp(duration_us));
                core_busy = mul_fp(core_busy, sample_ratio);
--

I've been considering making a change like this, but I wasn't quite
sure how much greater the multiplier should be, so I've queued this
one up for 4.6.

We need to test power impact on different server workloads. So please
hold on.
We have server folks complaining that we already consume too much
power.

I'll drop the commit if it turns out to cause too much energy to be consumed.

Thanks,
Rafael