public inbox for linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>
To: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: DRAM power consumption with turbostat
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2022 09:34:26 +0100 (CET)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2202060933280.3126@hadrien> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <44a1ea665bad28a8e2d314427d9c50c214e1a436.camel@intel.com>



On Sun, 6 Feb 2022, Zhang Rui wrote:

> Hi, Julia,
>
> Thanks for reporting this.
>
> On Sun, 2022-01-30 at 11:27 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I was wondering whether the DRAM power consumption reported by
> > turbostat
> > is reliable on recent Intel machines?
> >
> > In particular, I observed that turbostat reported a high DRAM energy
> > comsumption on a machine (Intel 5128)
>
> are you sure it is 5128? google tells me that 5128 is pretty old, in
> around 2006.

Oops!  5218

Thanks for the pointer to the new version.  I will try that.

julia

>
> can you please paste the lscpu output?
>
> >  with persistent memory, but where
> > the persistent memory was not being used.  A colleague did an
> > experiemnt
> > on another machine with persistent memory, and reported:
> >
> > -----
> >
> > I didn't run the test on troll but on another server equipped with PM
> > where I was able to reproduce the bug and by reading directly the msr
> > registers, I see that:
> > CPU Energy units = 0.00006104J
> > DRAM Energy units = 0.00001526J
> >
> > However turbostat assumes that the DRAM  Energy units is 0.00006104J
> > when
> > it runs the computation to obtain Joules (hence the too-high value
> > returned by turbostat)
>
> And can you please try latest version of turbostat?
>
> The problem should be fixed by the below commit
>
> commit abdc75ab53b7fd2ef42c79e88cf0caf2d007c4f2
> Author:     Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
> AuthorDate: Thu Mar 11 10:05:13 2021 +0800
> Commit:     Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> CommitDate: Tue May 4 18:23:14 2021 -0400
>
>     tools/power turbostat: Fix DRAM Energy Unit on SKX
>
>     SKX uses fixed DRAM Energy Unit, just like HSX and BDX.
>
>     Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
>     Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
>
> thanks,
> rui
> >
> > -----
> >
> > I see the code in turbostat that just uses the CPU energy units value
> > (rapl_dram_energy_units_probe), but I don't know what was the MSR
> > used to
> > collect the above information.  Overall, I am wondering if the DRAM
> > energy
> > consumption values are reliable in cases with and without persistent
> > memory.
> >
> > thanks,
> > julia
>
>

  reply	other threads:[~2022-02-06  8:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-01-30 10:27 DRAM power consumption with turbostat Julia Lawall
2022-02-06  8:29 ` Zhang Rui
2022-02-06  8:34   ` Julia Lawall [this message]
2022-02-06  9:32   ` Julia Lawall

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=alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2202060933280.3126@hadrien \
    --to=julia.lawall@inria.fr \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rui.zhang@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