2 ms·

"You have zero expertise to be saying this." This is 100% false. I do bringup on these platforms. I know a lot about them. "I'm going to favor the industry's

"You have zero expertise to be saying this." This is 100% false. I do bringup on these platforms. I know a lot about them. "I'm going to favor the industry's interpretation of this a bit more than your anecdotal, occasional compiler-writer knowledge. " Dude, i literally do the toolchain bringup on these platforms you claim i have no knowledge of. This is not "anecdotal occasional compiler-writer knowledge". This is "I get paid to make the stuff you keep talking about work fast and get good battery life out of it". If what you say was true, then one would expect that when they were brought up, they would have worse performance and better battery life. Instead, the exact opposite is true in most cases. They have slightly better performance, and much worse battery life. Try it sometime. Battery life is gotten back mainly through .. wait for it ... compiler optimization ... to speed up the software so things can sleep faster. Not to "move things onto the little cores to save power", as you seem to think. Since you want to attack my experience, remind me again, what background do you have in this again? (FWIW - I would stay away from this argument line as it is unlikely to serve you well) As swetland (who was android's main kernel guy for a long time) pointed out to you, you literally have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to CPU sleeping and what the main power policies are. BTW, much earlier i asked if you had anything other than self-serving industry press releases to back up your claims. I'm guessing the answer is "no", given what you've written. Anyway, i'm going to stop responding now, because i'm just some anecdotal compiler writer, and clearly i can't compete with your vast knowledge store and experience on this one.

inversionOf 11y ago
This thread should embarrass you. Christ, I'm embarrassed for you. I linked multiple real world demonstrations (both the technical data, and actual observations of these cores in practice) of how big little is used for power consumption, including specific details of the core power profiles. You still allude to your great, clearly laughable, expertise and actually continue arguing this. Remarkable. You are a Hacker News "Expert" and a bore. You are far, far out of your depth, and you should stop responding to topics where your knowledge is hilariously wrong. you literally have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to CPU sleeping He said that cores slept as much as "every 50ms". 50ms is an enormous period of time, and is a colossally granular mechanism of power reduction. They didn't discount what I said at all (in fact, talking about the millisecond scale when discussing a costly CPU activity is pretty bizarre to begin with), though it is unsurprising that you try to hang on that. Not to mention that their comment is simply dated and wrong now regardless. anything other than self-serving industry press releases to back up your claims. Comical. And yet you'll wave your hand at "battery life" based upon utterly nothing. Hey guys - ARM, Samsung, Qualcomm --- disregard them, and disregard actual observations of how these SoCs operate in the field on varying demand workloads -- because this guy knows how compilers are written and he does little winky faces. Save the world from your ignorance. The mere fact that you continually reference your great compiler writer knowledge in relation to core design is, honestly, embarrassing.
- engi_nerd 11y ago
  To an outsider that doesn't know much about phone architecture: 1) I can easily envision a scenario where he really is an expert but is not necessarily allowed to come out and say "I am a senior embedded systems engineer working for XYZ Mobile Devices" and has years of experience and is sitting there laughing at you. I should know because there are a couple of completely unrelated subjects that get widely discussed on the internet where I am an expert but can't just flat out state all my qualifications. I try to contribute sometimes in discussions about these subjects but often people say I have no idea what I'm talking about. 2) You seem to believe that he cannot possibly be an expert. He disagrees, and offers no absolute proof (and really, does he have to do that? Why can't we just be nice to each other). 3) I am embarrassed for you because you have seemed to be very mean and dismissive. Even if you're right, using phrases like "You are a Hacker News "Expert" and a bore" and "Save the world from your ignorance" just makes me feel that you're being rude.
  - inversionOf 11y ago
    "You seem to believe that he cannot possibly be an expert." Bringing up writing a compiler in relation to SoC design is, in itself, absurd. It undermines the expert claim to begin with. Waving one's hands at "industry mumbo jumbo" (even ARM reference architectures) and alluding to your own claims of knowledge is...incredibly ignorant. It is so far below what HN aspires to be it boggles. It is what they said that discounts the mere possibility that they have even a basic layman knowledge of the topic, much less are an expert. "I am embarrassed for you because you have seemed to be very mean and dismissive." Did you read what DannyBee was saying at all? In response to empirically proven, well backed statements they disagreed, did the knowing wink and patronizing pat on the back, and pretended to have more knowledge based upon a growing volume of claims (first "write compilers", then "toolchain", then "toolchain bringup", none of which have anything to do with SoC-targeted schedulers). I didn't fire the first shot in being "mean and dismissive", and considering how profoundly ignorant this whole discussion is I was being as kind as possible. It's actually interesting: You have no idea what my qualifications are, or my interest in this topic. Nor do I expect anyone, which is exactly why I cite actual data and information, not just my wink-wink/trust me/"don't believe those SoC fatcats" knowledge.

inversionOf 11y ago

This thread should embarrass you. Christ, I'm embarrassed for you. I linked multiple real world demonstrations (both the technical data, and actual observations of these cores in practice) of how big little is used for power consumption, including specific details of the core power profiles. You still allude to your great, clearly laughable, expertise and actually continue arguing this. Remarkable. You are a Hacker News "Expert" and a bore. You are far, far out of your depth, and you should stop responding to topics where your knowledge is hilariously wrong. you literally have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to CPU sleeping He said that cores slept as much as "every 50ms". 50ms is an enormous period of time, and is a colossally granular mechanism of power reduction. They didn't discount what I said at all (in fact, talking about the millisecond scale when discussing a costly CPU activity is pretty bizarre to begin with), though it is unsurprising that you try to hang on that. Not to mention that their comment is simply dated and wrong now regardless. anything other than self-serving industry press releases to back up your claims. Comical. And yet you'll wave your hand at "battery life" based upon utterly nothing. Hey guys - ARM, Samsung, Qualcomm --- disregard them, and disregard actual observations of how these SoCs operate in the field on varying demand workloads -- because this guy knows how compilers are written and he does little winky faces. Save the world from your ignorance. The mere fact that you continually reference your great compiler writer knowledge in relation to core design is, honestly, embarrassing.

engi_nerd 11y ago
To an outsider that doesn't know much about phone architecture: 1) I can easily envision a scenario where he really is an expert but is not necessarily allowed to come out and say "I am a senior embedded systems engineer working for XYZ Mobile Devices" and has years of experience and is sitting there laughing at you. I should know because there are a couple of completely unrelated subjects that get widely discussed on the internet where I am an expert but can't just flat out state all my qualifications. I try to contribute sometimes in discussions about these subjects but often people say I have no idea what I'm talking about. 2) You seem to believe that he cannot possibly be an expert. He disagrees, and offers no absolute proof (and really, does he have to do that? Why can't we just be nice to each other). 3) I am embarrassed for you because you have seemed to be very mean and dismissive. Even if you're right, using phrases like "You are a Hacker News "Expert" and a bore" and "Save the world from your ignorance" just makes me feel that you're being rude.
- inversionOf 11y ago
  "You seem to believe that he cannot possibly be an expert." Bringing up writing a compiler in relation to SoC design is, in itself, absurd. It undermines the expert claim to begin with. Waving one's hands at "industry mumbo jumbo" (even ARM reference architectures) and alluding to your own claims of knowledge is...incredibly ignorant. It is so far below what HN aspires to be it boggles. It is what they said that discounts the mere possibility that they have even a basic layman knowledge of the topic, much less are an expert. "I am embarrassed for you because you have seemed to be very mean and dismissive." Did you read what DannyBee was saying at all? In response to empirically proven, well backed statements they disagreed, did the knowing wink and patronizing pat on the back, and pretended to have more knowledge based upon a growing volume of claims (first "write compilers", then "toolchain", then "toolchain bringup", none of which have anything to do with SoC-targeted schedulers). I didn't fire the first shot in being "mean and dismissive", and considering how profoundly ignorant this whole discussion is I was being as kind as possible. It's actually interesting: You have no idea what my qualifications are, or my interest in this topic. Nor do I expect anyone, which is exactly why I cite actual data and information, not just my wink-wink/trust me/"don't believe those SoC fatcats" knowledge.