From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
mingo@elte.hu, peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
davej@redhat.com, cpufreq@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] ondemand: Solve the big performance issue with ondemand during disk IO
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2010 06:56:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100424045626.GA7561@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100423065248.3b0a98ab@infradead.org>
Hi!
> > Well, and now, if you do something like cat /dev/<your usb1.1 hdd> >
> > /dev/null, you'll keep cpu on max frequency. Not a problem for new
> > core i7, but probably big deal for athlon 64.
>
> do you have facts not speculation for this? Does the athlon 64 really
> keep its voltage high during idle? That would surprise me greatly...
So... some old data. It is not exactly athlon 64 -- I don't have that
particular number for it -- but: (from my old notes):
evo n620c [63.3 Wh]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
idle machine at 1.7GHz, min bl: 13.0 W
idle machine at 600MHz, min bl: 12.0 W
thinkpad x32 [52Wh]
~~~~~~~~~~~~
idle machine at 600MHz, min bl: 10 W
at 1.8GHz: +6.6 W
hp nx5k [56.8Wh]
~~~~~~~
idle, min bl: 19 W
min bl, 1.4GHz: 22 W
...so yes, I kind of see a pattern there. And you should be able to
easily see the difference, too, if you took something from that era...
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-24 4:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-18 18:59 [PATCH 0/7] Fix performance issue with ondemand governor Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-18 19:00 ` [PATCH 1/7] sched: add a comment to get_cpu_idle_time_us() Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-26 19:25 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-18 19:01 ` [PATCH 2/7] sched: introduce a function to update the idle statistics Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-26 20:11 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-18 19:01 ` [PATCH 3/7] sched: update the idle statistics in get_cpu_idle_time_us() Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-26 20:36 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-18 19:02 ` [PATCH 4/7] sched: fold updating of the last update time into update_ts_time_stats() Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-26 20:58 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-18 19:02 ` [PATCH 5/7] sched: eliminate the ts->idle_lastupdate field Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-26 21:00 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-18 19:03 ` [PATCH 6/7] sched: introduce get_cpu_iowait_time_us() Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-26 21:05 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-18 19:03 ` [PATCH 7/7] ondemand: Solve the big performance issue with ondemand during disk IO Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-19 8:29 ` Éric Piel
2010-04-19 13:43 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-19 14:30 ` Éric Piel
2010-04-19 14:47 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-20 9:24 ` Thomas Renninger
2010-04-27 0:29 ` Mike Chan
2010-04-27 13:01 ` Pavel Machek
2010-04-27 18:10 ` Mike Chan
2010-04-19 9:09 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2010-04-19 13:46 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-19 15:29 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2010-04-20 0:47 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-20 9:10 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2010-04-20 11:02 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-28 8:57 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2010-04-23 5:26 ` Pavel Machek
2010-04-20 9:29 ` Thomas Renninger
2010-04-20 11:07 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-23 5:24 ` Pavel Machek
2010-04-23 5:38 ` Willy Tarreau
2010-04-23 8:50 ` Thomas Renninger
2010-04-23 16:08 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-27 11:39 ` Thomas Renninger
2010-05-04 3:48 ` [PATCH 8/7] cpufreq: make the iowait-is-busy-time a sysfs tunable Arjan van de Ven
2010-05-04 4:16 ` Willy Tarreau
2010-05-04 5:43 ` Pavel Machek
2010-05-04 13:51 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-23 14:10 ` [PATCH 7/7] ondemand: Solve the big performance issue with ondemand during disk IO Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-23 15:35 ` Willy Tarreau
2010-04-23 13:52 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-23 8:38 ` Pavel Machek
2010-04-23 16:06 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-24 4:56 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2010-05-01 23:29 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-26 21:30 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-26 21:41 ` [PATCH 0/7] Fix performance issue with ondemand governor Dave Jones
2010-04-26 21:45 ` Dominik Brodowski
2010-04-26 21:59 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-26 22:05 ` Dominik Brodowski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100424045626.GA7561@elf.ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=cpufreq@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.