public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Power consumption HZ250 vs. HZ1000
@ 2005-07-25 14:13 Marc Ballarin
  2005-07-25 15:53 ` Pavel Machek
  2005-07-25 20:14 ` Bill Davidsen
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Marc Ballarin @ 2005-07-25 14:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Hi,
I did some measurements in order to compare power drain with HZ250 and
HZ1000.
To measure the actual drain, I used the "smart" battery's internal measurement.
(Available with acpi-sbs in /proc/acpi/sbs/SBS0/SB0/state.)
No clue how accurate this is.

Here some battery details, in case someone knows:
charge reporting error:  25%
SB specification:        v1.1 (with PEC)
manufacturer name:       Panasonic
manufacture date:        2004-11-27
device name:             02ZL
device chemistry:        Lion

Kernel: 2.6.13-rc3-mm1 + acpi-sbs

CPU:
cpu family	: 6
model		: 13
model name	: Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.60GHz
stepping		: 6

The "ondemand" governor was running, using acpi_cpufreq. (Idle at 600MHz).

Systems was running X11/KDE to get a more or less realistic scenario. No
cron jobs, network traffic or additional applications. WLAN and built-in
display were disabled completely, all fans and LEDs were off, internal hard
disc was running. Additional peripherals: external keyboard, mouse, display
and externally-powered hard disk (USB).

The results are quite simple:
In both configurations the current settles between 727-729 mA
(Voltage ~16.5 V).

Some issues:

- C-states look strange:
active state:            C2
max_cstate:              C8
bus master activity:     00887fff
states:
    C1:                  type[C1] promotion[C2] demotion[--]   latency[000] usage[00000010]
  *C2:                  type[C2] promotion[C3] demotion[C1] latency[001] usage[01367471]
    C3:                  type[C3] promotion[--]   demotion[C2] latency[085] usage[00000000]

- I don't know, how much polling of the battery affects results. Reads always
block for ~10 seconds, and I used this behaviour for rate-limiting.

- Is this approach valid at all?

- I could repeat the test in single user mode with internal hard disc turned off.

Regards

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* RE: Power consumption HZ250 vs. HZ1000
@ 2005-07-26  5:08 Brown, Len
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Brown, Len @ 2005-07-26  5:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Marc Ballarin, linux-kernel

yes, this approach is valid.
I've done the exact same measurements for 100HZ vs 1000HZ.
For currently shipping laptops, I didn't see a significant
difference.,

Note that the quality of the instrumentation on
the battery can vary widely, and so if you really
want the best numbers you need to start from a fully
charged battery and run it until the battery dies.

Also, for the most controlled experiment, you can
run in single user mode with no network, no USB plugged
in, and either "performance" or "powersave" governors.
If you don't get into C3 on this box nearly all the time
then something is wrong.

cheers,
-Len


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2005-07-27 11:21 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-07-25 14:13 Power consumption HZ250 vs. HZ1000 Marc Ballarin
2005-07-25 15:53 ` Pavel Machek
2005-07-25 19:02   ` Marc Ballarin
2005-07-26 23:28     ` dean gaudet
2005-07-27  7:51   ` Tony Lindgren
2005-07-27  8:00     ` Pavel Machek
2005-07-27 11:20       ` Tony Lindgren
2005-07-25 20:14 ` Bill Davidsen
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-07-26  5:08 Brown, Len

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox