From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>,
discuss@LessWatts.org,
Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>,
venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>,
Chanda Sethia <chanda.sethia@in.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Analysis of sched_mc_power_savings
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 14:20:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080109132014.GF27196@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080109122847.GA28955@dirshya.in.ibm.com>
* Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> I will watch this during the experiments. I have been using klog
> application to dump relayfs data. I did run powertop and top as well,
> I will bind them to certain CPUs and isolate their impact.
>
> I believe the margin of error would be less since all the measurement
> tasks sleep for long duration.
ok, long duration ought to be enough.
i think a possible explanation of your observtions would be this: sleepy
workloads are affected more by the wakeup logic, and most of the
power-savings works via runtime balancing.
So perhaps try to add some SD_POWERSAVINGS_BALANCE logic to
try_to_wake_up()? I think waking up on the same CPU where it went to
sleep is the most power-efficient approach in general. (or always waking
up where the wakee runs - this should be measured.) Right now
try_to_wake_up() tries to spread out load opportunistically, which is
throughput-maximizing but it's arguably not very power conscious.
Ingo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-09 13:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-08 17:38 Analysis of sched_mc_power_savings Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-01-08 21:24 ` Siddha, Suresh B
2008-01-09 11:13 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-01-09 11:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-09 12:28 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-01-09 13:20 ` Ingo Molnar [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=20080109132014.GF27196@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=chanda.sethia@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=discuss@LessWatts.org \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.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