From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
To: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>,
"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
"svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>,
"andi@firstfloor.org" <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]new ACPI processor driver to force CPUs idle
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:49:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090626194908.GA11492@srcf.ucam.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0906261209370.4148@localhost.localdomain>
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 12:46:53PM -0400, Len Brown wrote:
> Low Frequency Mode (LFM), aka Pn - the deepest P-state,
> is the lowest energy/instruction because it is this highest
> frequency available at the lowest voltage that can still
> retire instructions.
>
> That is why it is the first method used -- it returns the
> highest power_savings/performance_impact.
For a straightforward workload on a dual package system, do you get more
performance from two packages running at their lowest P state or from
one package at its highest P state and a forced-idle package? Which
consumes more power?
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-26 19:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-24 4:13 [PATCH]new ACPI processor driver to force CPUs idle Shaohua Li
2009-06-24 6:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-06-24 7:47 ` Shaohua Li
2009-06-24 8:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-06-24 8:21 ` Shaohua Li
2009-06-26 18:16 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-06-29 2:54 ` Shaohua Li
2009-07-06 18:03 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-07-06 23:43 ` Andi Kleen
2009-07-07 0:50 ` Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2009-07-10 19:31 ` Len Brown
2009-06-24 17:20 ` Len Brown
2009-06-26 7:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-06-26 16:46 ` Len Brown
2009-06-26 18:42 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-07-10 19:47 ` Len Brown
2009-06-26 19:49 ` Matthew Garrett [this message]
2009-07-10 20:29 ` Len Brown
2009-06-30 8:02 ` Shaohua Li
2009-07-07 8:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-07 8:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-10 20:41 ` Len Brown
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=20090626194908.GA11492@srcf.ucam.org \
--to=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
--cc=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox