On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 06:59:35 PM Jörg Otte wrote: > 2016-10-19 17:29 GMT+02:00 Linus Torvalds <torva...@linux-foundation.org>: > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 4:07 AM, Jörg Otte <jrg.o...@gmail.com> 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). Thanks, Rafael
