lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC v1] Tunable sched_mc_power_savings=n
On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 02:36:02PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:

> For example if you're in a data center at a specific operating point and
> you would need to crank up the air condition at significant power cost it might
> be well better overall to force all servers to a lower operating point
> and avoid that.

Sure, there are cases where you have additional constraints. But within
those constraints, you probably want to run as fast as possible.

> That said in general you all should have complained when ondemand behaviour
> was introduced.

ignore_nice seems to be set to 0 by default?

> Also it's unclear that the general "race to idle" heuristic really
> applies to the case of the "keep sockets idle" power optimization
> that started this thread.
>
> Usually package C states bring much more than core C states
> and keeping another package completely idle saves likely
> more power than the power cost of running something a little
> bit slower on a package that is already busy on another core.

I'd agree with that.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-06-28 14:59    [W:0.119 / U:0.440 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site