From: Wes Felter <wesley@felter.org>
To: linux-pm@lists.osdl.org
Cc: power@bughost.org
Subject: Re: Metrics for comparing power savings of patches...
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 13:31:36 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fs0uu9$ge6$1@ger.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080307170105.AF99E1A0039@mailserver8.hushmail.com>
Scott Thompson wrote:
> Also, if anyone knows of any free benchmarks, best practices, or
> guidelines for trying to do comparative power analysis for patches
> with wattmeters please let me know.
The gold standard appears to be the SPECpower methodology.
http://www.spec.org/power_ssj2008/docs/SPECpower-Methodology.pdf
Unfortunately, I've heard their certified power meters are quite expensive.
Wes Felter - wesley@felter.org
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-21 18:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-07 17:01 Metrics for comparing power savings of patches Scott Thompson
2008-03-16 19:03 ` Pavel Machek
2008-03-17 15:50 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-03-21 18:31 ` Wes Felter [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='fs0uu9$ge6$1@ger.gmane.org' \
--to=wesley@felter.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=power@bughost.org \
/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.