Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Marc Ballarin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 790 bytes --]

Hi,
I was finally able to get C3 state working. It seems that my BIOS is
leaving USB controllers in an active state(?). Without any USB drivers
loaded, C3 is not possible. With drivers loaded, but no device plugged
in C3 works fine. Kernel is 2.6.13-rc3-mm3 + acpi-sbs.

With working C3 there are indeed differences:

Voltage is 16.5 V

HZ=100:  ~460 mA => 7.59 W
HZ=250:  ~468 mA => 7.72 W
HZ=1000: ~494 mA => 8.15 W

Results are quite stable.

Test environment:
- Pentium M 1.60GHz, model 13, stepping 6
- ondemand governor with acpi-cpufreq (idle at 600MHz)
- no daemons running
- no external devices attached, except display
- WLAN disabled via kill switch
- internal display disabled
- hard disk in sleep mode (hdparm -Y), data dumped to ramfs
- kernel configuration attached

Regards

[-- Attachment #2: config --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 21457 bytes --]

#
# Automatically generated make config: don't edit
# Linux kernel version: 2.6.13-rc3-mm3
# Fri Jul 29 23:35:57 2005
#
CONFIG_X86=y
CONFIG_SEMAPHORE_SLEEPERS=y
CONFIG_MMU=y
CONFIG_UID16=y
CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA=y
CONFIG_GENERIC_IOMAP=y

#
# Code maturity level options
#
CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL=y
CONFIG_CLEAN_COMPILE=y
CONFIG_BROKEN_ON_SMP=y
CONFIG_INIT_ENV_ARG_LIMIT=32

#
# General setup
#
CONFIG_LOCALVERSION="-hztest"
CONFIG_SWAP=y
CONFIG_SYSVIPC=y
# CONFIG_POSIX_MQUEUE is not set
# CONFIG_BSD_PROCESS_ACCT is not set

#
# Class Based Kernel Resource Management
#
# CONFIG_CKRM is not set
CONFIG_SYSCTL=y
# CONFIG_AUDIT is not set
# CONFIG_HOTPLUG is not set
# CONFIG_KOBJECT_UEVENT is not set
CONFIG_IKCONFIG=y
CONFIG_IKCONFIG_PROC=y
# CONFIG_EMBEDDED is not set
# CONFIG_DELAY_ACCT is not set
CONFIG_KALLSYMS=y
# CONFIG_KALLSYMS_EXTRA_PASS is not set
CONFIG_PRINTK=y
CONFIG_BUG=y
CONFIG_BASE_FULL=y
CONFIG_FUTEX=y
CONFIG_EPOLL=y
CONFIG_SHMEM=y
CONFIG_CC_ALIGN_FUNCTIONS=0
CONFIG_CC_ALIGN_LABELS=0
CONFIG_CC_ALIGN_LOOPS=0
CONFIG_CC_ALIGN_JUMPS=0
# CONFIG_TINY_SHMEM is not set
CONFIG_BASE_SMALL=0

#
# Loadable module support
#
CONFIG_MODULES=y
# CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD is not set
CONFIG_OBSOLETE_MODPARM=y
# CONFIG_MODVERSIONS is not set
# CONFIG_MODULE_SRCVERSION_ALL is not set
# CONFIG_KMOD is not set

#
# Processor type and features
#
CONFIG_X86_PC=y
# CONFIG_X86_ELAN is not set
# CONFIG_X86_VOYAGER is not set
# CONFIG_X86_NUMAQ is not set
# CONFIG_X86_SUMMIT is not set
# CONFIG_X86_BIGSMP is not set
# CONFIG_X86_VISWS is not set
# CONFIG_X86_GENERICARCH is not set
# CONFIG_X86_ES7000 is not set
# CONFIG_M386 is not set
# CONFIG_M486 is not set
# CONFIG_M586 is not set
# CONFIG_M586TSC is not set
# CONFIG_M586MMX is not set
# CONFIG_M686 is not set
# CONFIG_MPENTIUMII is not set
# CONFIG_MPENTIUMIII is not set
CONFIG_MPENTIUMM=y
# CONFIG_MPENTIUM4 is not set
# CONFIG_MK6 is not set
# CONFIG_MK7 is not set
# CONFIG_MK8 is not set
# CONFIG_MCRUSOE is not set
# CONFIG_MEFFICEON is not set
# CONFIG_MWINCHIPC6 is not set
# CONFIG_MWINCHIP2 is not set
# CONFIG_MWINCHIP3D is not set
# CONFIG_MGEODEGX1 is not set
# CONFIG_MCYRIXIII is not set
# CONFIG_MVIAC3_2 is not set
# CONFIG_X86_GENERIC is not set
CONFIG_X86_CMPXCHG=y
CONFIG_X86_XADD=y
CONFIG_X86_L1_CACHE_SHIFT=6
CONFIG_RWSEM_XCHGADD_ALGORITHM=y
CONFIG_GENERIC_CALIBRATE_DELAY=y
CONFIG_X86_WP_WORKS_OK=y
CONFIG_X86_INVLPG=y
CONFIG_X86_BSWAP=y
CONFIG_X86_POPAD_OK=y
CONFIG_X86_GOOD_APIC=y
CONFIG_X86_INTEL_USERCOPY=y
CONFIG_X86_USE_PPRO_CHECKSUM=y
CONFIG_HPET_TIMER=y
# CONFIG_SMP is not set
CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE=y
# CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY is not set
# CONFIG_PREEMPT is not set
CONFIG_X86_UP_APIC=y
CONFIG_X86_UP_IOAPIC=y
CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC=y
CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC=y
CONFIG_X86_TSC=y
# CONFIG_X86_MCE is not set
# CONFIG_TOSHIBA is not set
# CONFIG_I8K is not set
# CONFIG_X86_REBOOTFIXUPS is not set
# CONFIG_MICROCODE is not set
# CONFIG_X86_MSR is not set
# CONFIG_X86_CPUID is not set

#
# Firmware Drivers
#
CONFIG_EDD=y
CONFIG_NOHIGHMEM=y
# CONFIG_HIGHMEM4G is not set
# CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G is not set
CONFIG_SELECT_MEMORY_MODEL=y
CONFIG_FLATMEM_MANUAL=y
# CONFIG_DISCONTIGMEM_MANUAL is not set
# CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_MANUAL is not set
CONFIG_FLATMEM=y
CONFIG_FLAT_NODE_MEM_MAP=y
# CONFIG_MATH_EMULATION is not set
CONFIG_MTRR=y
# CONFIG_EFI is not set
CONFIG_REGPARM=y
# CONFIG_SECCOMP is not set
# CONFIG_HZ_100 is not set
# CONFIG_HZ_250 is not set
CONFIG_HZ_1000=y
CONFIG_HZ=1000
CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START=0x100000
# CONFIG_KEXEC is not set

#
# Power management options (ACPI, APM)
#
CONFIG_PM=y
# CONFIG_PM_DEBUG is not set
# CONFIG_SOFTWARE_SUSPEND is not set

#
# ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface) Support
#
CONFIG_ACPI=y
CONFIG_ACPI_BOOT=y
CONFIG_ACPI_INTERPRETER=y
# CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP is not set
# CONFIG_ACPI_AC is not set
# CONFIG_ACPI_BATTERY is not set
CONFIG_ACPI_BUTTON=y
CONFIG_ACPI_VIDEO=y
CONFIG_ACPI_HOTKEY=y
CONFIG_ACPI_FAN=y
CONFIG_ACPI_PROCESSOR=y
CONFIG_ACPI_THERMAL=y
# CONFIG_ACPI_ASUS is not set
# CONFIG_ACPI_IBM is not set
# CONFIG_ACPI_TOSHIBA is not set
CONFIG_ACPI_BLACKLIST_YEAR=0
# CONFIG_ACPI_DEBUG is not set
CONFIG_ACPI_BUS=y
CONFIG_ACPI_EC=y
CONFIG_ACPI_POWER=y
CONFIG_ACPI_PCI=y
CONFIG_ACPI_SYSTEM=y
CONFIG_X86_PM_TIMER=y
# CONFIG_ACPI_CONTAINER is not set

#
# APM (Advanced Power Management) BIOS Support
#
# CONFIG_APM is not set

#
# Performance-monitoring counters support
#
CONFIG_PERFCTR=y
# CONFIG_PERFCTR_INIT_TESTS is not set
CONFIG_PERFCTR_VIRTUAL=y
CONFIG_PERFCTR_INTERRUPT_SUPPORT=y

#
# CPU Frequency scaling
#
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_TABLE=y
# CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEBUG is not set
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_STAT=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_STAT_DETAILS=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE=y
# CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_USERSPACE is not set
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_PERFORMANCE=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_POWERSAVE=y
# CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_USERSPACE is not set
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_ONDEMAND=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_CONSERVATIVE=y

#
# CPUFreq processor drivers
#
CONFIG_X86_ACPI_CPUFREQ=m
# CONFIG_X86_POWERNOW_K6 is not set
# CONFIG_X86_POWERNOW_K7 is not set
# CONFIG_X86_POWERNOW_K8 is not set
# CONFIG_X86_GX_SUSPMOD is not set
CONFIG_X86_SPEEDSTEP_CENTRINO=m
CONFIG_X86_SPEEDSTEP_CENTRINO_ACPI=y
# CONFIG_X86_SPEEDSTEP_CENTRINO_TABLE is not set
# CONFIG_X86_SPEEDSTEP_ICH is not set
# CONFIG_X86_SPEEDSTEP_SMI is not set
# CONFIG_X86_P4_CLOCKMOD is not set
# CONFIG_X86_CPUFREQ_NFORCE2 is not set
# CONFIG_X86_LONGRUN is not set
# CONFIG_X86_LONGHAUL is not set

#
# shared options
#
# CONFIG_X86_ACPI_CPUFREQ_PROC_INTF is not set
# CONFIG_X86_SPEEDSTEP_LIB is not set

#
# Bus options (PCI, PCMCIA, EISA, MCA, ISA)
#
CONFIG_PCI=y
# CONFIG_PCI_GOBIOS is not set
# CONFIG_PCI_GOMMCONFIG is not set
# CONFIG_PCI_GODIRECT is not set
CONFIG_PCI_GOANY=y
CONFIG_PCI_BIOS=y
CONFIG_PCI_DIRECT=y
CONFIG_PCI_MMCONFIG=y
# CONFIG_PCIEPORTBUS is not set
# CONFIG_PCI_MSI is not set
# CONFIG_PCI_LEGACY_PROC is not set
CONFIG_ISA_DMA_API=y
CONFIG_ISA=y
# CONFIG_EISA is not set
# CONFIG_MCA is not set
# CONFIG_SCx200 is not set

#
# PCCARD (PCMCIA/CardBus) support
#
# CONFIG_PCCARD is not set

#
# PCI Hotplug Support
#
# CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI is not set

#
# Executable file formats
#
CONFIG_BINFMT_ELF=y
# CONFIG_BINFMT_AOUT is not set
CONFIG_BINFMT_MISC=y

#
# Networking
#
CONFIG_NET=y

#
# Networking options
#
CONFIG_PACKET=y
# CONFIG_PACKET_MMAP is not set
CONFIG_UNIX=y
# CONFIG_NET_KEY is not set
CONFIG_INET=y
CONFIG_IP_MULTICAST=y
# CONFIG_IP_ADVANCED_ROUTER is not set
CONFIG_IP_FIB_HASH=y
# CONFIG_IP_PNP is not set
# CONFIG_NET_IPIP is not set
# CONFIG_NET_IPGRE is not set
# CONFIG_IP_MROUTE is not set
# CONFIG_ARPD is not set
CONFIG_SYN_COOKIES=y
# CONFIG_INET_AH is not set
# CONFIG_INET_ESP is not set
# CONFIG_INET_IPCOMP is not set
# CONFIG_INET_TUNNEL is not set
CONFIG_IP_TCPDIAG=y
# CONFIG_IP_TCPDIAG_IPV6 is not set
# CONFIG_TCP_CONG_ADVANCED is not set
CONFIG_TCP_CONG_BIC=y
# CONFIG_IPV6 is not set
# CONFIG_NETFILTER is not set

#
# SCTP Configuration (EXPERIMENTAL)
#
# CONFIG_IP_SCTP is not set
# CONFIG_ATM is not set
# CONFIG_BRIDGE is not set
# CONFIG_VLAN_8021Q is not set
# CONFIG_DECNET is not set
# CONFIG_LLC2 is not set
# CONFIG_IPX is not set
# CONFIG_ATALK is not set
# CONFIG_X25 is not set
# CONFIG_LAPB is not set
# CONFIG_NET_DIVERT is not set
# CONFIG_ECONET is not set
# CONFIG_WAN_ROUTER is not set
# CONFIG_NET_SCHED is not set
# CONFIG_NET_CLS_ROUTE is not set

#
# Network testing
#
# CONFIG_NET_PKTGEN is not set
# CONFIG_HAMRADIO is not set
# CONFIG_IRDA is not set
# CONFIG_BT is not set

#
# Device Drivers
#

#
# Generic Driver Options
#
CONFIG_STANDALONE=y
CONFIG_PREVENT_FIRMWARE_BUILD=y
# CONFIG_FW_LOADER is not set

#
# Connector - unified userspace <-> kernelspace linker
#
# CONFIG_CONNECTOR is not set
# CONFIG_EXIT_CONNECTOR is not set
# CONFIG_FORK_CONNECTOR is not set

#
# Memory Technology Devices (MTD)
#
# CONFIG_MTD is not set

#
# Parallel port support
#
# CONFIG_PARPORT is not set

#
# Plug and Play support
#
# CONFIG_PNP is not set

#
# Block devices
#
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_FD is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_XD is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_CPQ_DA is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_CPQ_CISS_DA is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_DAC960 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_UMEM is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_COW_COMMON is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_LOOP is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_NBD is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SX8 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_UB is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_RAM is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_RAM_COUNT=16
CONFIG_INITRAMFS_SOURCE=""
# CONFIG_LBD is not set
# CONFIG_CDROM_PKTCDVD is not set

#
# IO Schedulers
#
CONFIG_IOSCHED_NOOP=y
CONFIG_IOSCHED_AS=y
CONFIG_IOSCHED_DEADLINE=y
CONFIG_IOSCHED_CFQ=y
# CONFIG_ATA_OVER_ETH is not set

#
# ATA/ATAPI/MFM/RLL support
#
CONFIG_IDE=y
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDE=y

#
# Please see Documentation/ide.txt for help/info on IDE drives
#
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDE_SATA is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_HD_IDE is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDISK=y
CONFIG_IDEDISK_MULTI_MODE=y
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDECD=y
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDETAPE is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEFLOPPY is not set
# CONFIG_IDE_TASK_IOCTL is not set

#
# IDE chipset support/bugfixes
#
CONFIG_IDE_GENERIC=y
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_CMD640 is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEPCI=y
CONFIG_IDEPCI_SHARE_IRQ=y
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_OFFBOARD is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_GENERIC=y
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_OPTI621 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_RZ1000 is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDMA_PCI=y
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDMA_FORCED is not set
CONFIG_IDEDMA_PCI_AUTO=y
# CONFIG_IDEDMA_ONLYDISK is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_AEC62XX is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ALI15X3 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_AMD74XX is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ATIIXP is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_CMD64X is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_TRIFLEX is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_CY82C693 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_CS5520 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_CS5530 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_HPT34X is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_HPT366 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SC1200 is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_PIIX=y
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IT821X is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_NS87415 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_PDC202XX_OLD is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_PDC202XX_NEW is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SVWKS is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SIIMAGE is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SIS5513 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SLC90E66 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_TRM290 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_VIA82CXXX is not set
# CONFIG_IDE_ARM is not set
# CONFIG_IDE_CHIPSETS is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDMA=y
# CONFIG_IDEDMA_IVB is not set
CONFIG_IDEDMA_AUTO=y
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_HD is not set

#
# SCSI device support
#
# CONFIG_SCSI is not set

#
# Old CD-ROM drivers (not SCSI, not IDE)
#
# CONFIG_CD_NO_IDESCSI is not set

#
# Multi-device support (RAID and LVM)
#
# CONFIG_MD is not set

#
# Fusion MPT device support
#
# CONFIG_FUSION is not set

#
# IEEE 1394 (FireWire) support
#
# CONFIG_IEEE1394 is not set

#
# I2O device support
#
# CONFIG_I2O is not set

#
# Network device support
#
# CONFIG_NETDEVICES is not set
# CONFIG_KGDBOE is not set
# CONFIG_NETPOLL is not set
# CONFIG_NETPOLL_RX is not set
# CONFIG_NETPOLL_TRAP is not set
# CONFIG_NET_POLL_CONTROLLER is not set

#
# ISDN subsystem
#
# CONFIG_ISDN is not set

#
# Telephony Support
#
# CONFIG_PHONE is not set

#
# Input device support
#
CONFIG_INPUT=y

#
# Userland interfaces
#
CONFIG_INPUT_MOUSEDEV=y
# CONFIG_INPUT_MOUSEDEV_PSAUX is not set
CONFIG_INPUT_MOUSEDEV_SCREEN_X=1280
CONFIG_INPUT_MOUSEDEV_SCREEN_Y=800
# CONFIG_INPUT_JOYDEV is not set
# CONFIG_INPUT_TSDEV is not set
# CONFIG_INPUT_EVDEV is not set
# CONFIG_INPUT_EVBUG is not set

#
# Input Device Drivers
#
CONFIG_INPUT_KEYBOARD=y
CONFIG_KEYBOARD_ATKBD=y
# CONFIG_KEYBOARD_SUNKBD is not set
# CONFIG_KEYBOARD_LKKBD is not set
# CONFIG_KEYBOARD_XTKBD is not set
# CONFIG_KEYBOARD_NEWTON is not set
# CONFIG_INPUT_MOUSE is not set
# CONFIG_INPUT_JOYSTICK is not set
# CONFIG_INPUT_TOUCHSCREEN is not set
# CONFIG_INPUT_MISC is not set

#
# Hardware I/O ports
#
CONFIG_SERIO=y
CONFIG_SERIO_I8042=y
# CONFIG_SERIO_SERPORT is not set
# CONFIG_SERIO_CT82C710 is not set
# CONFIG_SERIO_PCIPS2 is not set
CONFIG_SERIO_LIBPS2=y
# CONFIG_SERIO_RAW is not set
# CONFIG_GAMEPORT is not set

#
# Character devices
#
CONFIG_VT=y
CONFIG_VT_CONSOLE=y
CONFIG_HW_CONSOLE=y
# CONFIG_SERIAL_NONSTANDARD is not set

#
# Serial drivers
#
# CONFIG_SERIAL_8250 is not set

#
# Non-8250 serial port support
#
# CONFIG_SERIAL_JSM is not set
CONFIG_UNIX98_PTYS=y
# CONFIG_LEGACY_PTYS is not set

#
# IPMI
#
# CONFIG_IPMI_HANDLER is not set

#
# Watchdog Cards
#
# CONFIG_WATCHDOG is not set
# CONFIG_HW_RANDOM is not set
# CONFIG_NVRAM is not set
# CONFIG_RTC is not set
# CONFIG_GEN_RTC is not set
# CONFIG_DTLK is not set
# CONFIG_R3964 is not set
# CONFIG_APPLICOM is not set
# CONFIG_SONYPI is not set

#
# Ftape, the floppy tape device driver
#
# CONFIG_FTAPE is not set
# CONFIG_AGP is not set
# CONFIG_DRM is not set
# CONFIG_MWAVE is not set
# CONFIG_RAW_DRIVER is not set
# CONFIG_HPET is not set
# CONFIG_HANGCHECK_TIMER is not set

#
# TPM devices
#
# CONFIG_TCG_TPM is not set

#
# I2C support
#
CONFIG_I2C=y
CONFIG_I2C_CHARDEV=m

#
# I2C Algorithms
#
CONFIG_I2C_ALGOBIT=y
# CONFIG_I2C_ALGOPCF is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_ALGOPCA is not set

#
# I2C Hardware Bus support
#
# CONFIG_I2C_ALI1535 is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_ALI1563 is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_ALI15X3 is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_AMD756 is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_AMD8111 is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_ELEKTOR is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_I801 is not set
CONFIG_I2C_I810=m
# CONFIG_I2C_PIIX4 is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_NFORCE2 is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_PARPORT_LIGHT is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_PROSAVAGE is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_SAVAGE4 is not set
# CONFIG_SCx200_ACB is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_SIS5595 is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_SIS630 is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_SIS96X is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_STUB is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_VIA is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_VIAPRO is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_VOODOO3 is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_PCA_ISA is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_SENSOR is not set

#
# Miscellaneous I2C Chip support
#
# CONFIG_SENSORS_DS1337 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_DS1374 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_EEPROM is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_PCF8574 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_PCA9539 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_PCF8591 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_RTC8564 is not set
# CONFIG_SENSORS_MAX6875 is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_DEBUG_CORE is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_DEBUG_ALGO is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_DEBUG_BUS is not set
# CONFIG_I2C_DEBUG_CHIP is not set

#
# Dallas's 1-wire bus
#
# CONFIG_W1 is not set

#
# Hardware Monitoring support
#
# CONFIG_HWMON is not set

#
# Misc devices
#
# CONFIG_IBM_ASM is not set

#
# Multimedia devices
#
# CONFIG_VIDEO_DEV is not set

#
# Digital Video Broadcasting Devices
#
# CONFIG_DVB is not set

#
# Graphics support
#
# CONFIG_FB is not set
CONFIG_VIDEO_SELECT=y

#
# Console display driver support
#
CONFIG_VGA_CONSOLE=y
# CONFIG_MDA_CONSOLE is not set
CONFIG_DUMMY_CONSOLE=y

#
# Speakup console speech
#
# CONFIG_SPEAKUP is not set

#
# Sound
#
# CONFIG_SOUND is not set

#
# USB support
#
CONFIG_USB_ARCH_HAS_HCD=y
CONFIG_USB_ARCH_HAS_OHCI=y
CONFIG_USB=y
# CONFIG_USB_DEBUG is not set

#
# Miscellaneous USB options
#
# CONFIG_USB_DEVICEFS is not set
# CONFIG_USB_BANDWIDTH is not set
# CONFIG_USB_DYNAMIC_MINORS is not set
# CONFIG_USB_SUSPEND is not set
# CONFIG_USB_OTG is not set

#
# USB Host Controller Drivers
#
CONFIG_USB_EHCI_HCD=y
# CONFIG_USB_EHCI_SPLIT_ISO is not set
# CONFIG_USB_EHCI_ROOT_HUB_TT is not set
# CONFIG_USB_ISP116X_HCD is not set
# CONFIG_USB_OHCI_HCD is not set
CONFIG_USB_UHCI_HCD=y
# CONFIG_USB_SL811_HCD is not set

#
# USB Device Class drivers
#
# CONFIG_USB_BLUETOOTH_TTY is not set
# CONFIG_USB_ACM is not set
# CONFIG_USB_PRINTER is not set

#
# NOTE: USB_STORAGE enables SCSI, and 'SCSI disk support' may also be needed; see USB_STORAGE Help for more information
#
# CONFIG_USB_STORAGE is not set

#
# USB Input Devices
#
# CONFIG_USB_HID is not set

#
# USB HID Boot Protocol drivers
#
# CONFIG_USB_KBD is not set
# CONFIG_USB_MOUSE is not set
# CONFIG_USB_AIPTEK is not set
# CONFIG_USB_WACOM is not set
# CONFIG_USB_ACECAD is not set
# CONFIG_USB_KBTAB is not set
# CONFIG_USB_POWERMATE is not set
# CONFIG_USB_MTOUCH is not set
# CONFIG_USB_ITMTOUCH is not set
# CONFIG_USB_EGALAX is not set
# CONFIG_USB_YEALINK is not set
# CONFIG_USB_XPAD is not set
# CONFIG_USB_ATI_REMOTE is not set
# CONFIG_USB_KEYSPAN_REMOTE is not set
# CONFIG_USB_APPLETOUCH is not set

#
# USB Imaging devices
#
# CONFIG_USB_MDC800 is not set

#
# USB Multimedia devices
#
# CONFIG_USB_DABUSB is not set

#
# Video4Linux support is needed for USB Multimedia device support
#

#
# USB Network Adapters
#
# CONFIG_USB_CATC is not set
# CONFIG_USB_KAWETH is not set
# CONFIG_USB_PEGASUS is not set
# CONFIG_USB_RTL8150 is not set
# CONFIG_USB_USBNET is not set
CONFIG_USB_MON=y

#
# USB port drivers
#

#
# USB Serial Converter support
#
# CONFIG_USB_SERIAL is not set

#
# USB Miscellaneous drivers
#
# CONFIG_USB_EMI62 is not set
# CONFIG_USB_EMI26 is not set
# CONFIG_USB_AUERSWALD is not set
# CONFIG_USB_RIO500 is not set
# CONFIG_USB_LEGOTOWER is not set
# CONFIG_USB_LCD is not set
# CONFIG_USB_LED is not set
# CONFIG_USB_CYTHERM is not set
# CONFIG_USB_GOTEMP is not set
# CONFIG_USB_PHIDGETKIT is not set
# CONFIG_USB_PHIDGETSERVO is not set
# CONFIG_USB_IDMOUSE is not set
# CONFIG_USB_SISUSBVGA is not set
# CONFIG_USB_LD is not set

#
# USB DSL modem support
#

#
# USB Gadget Support
#
# CONFIG_USB_GADGET is not set

#
# MMC/SD Card support
#
# CONFIG_MMC is not set

#
# InfiniBand support
#
# CONFIG_INFINIBAND is not set

#
# SN Devices
#

#
# Distributed Lock Manager
#
# CONFIG_DLM is not set

#
# File systems
#
# CONFIG_EXT2_FS is not set
CONFIG_EXT3_FS=y
CONFIG_EXT3_FS_XATTR=y
CONFIG_EXT3_FS_POSIX_ACL=y
CONFIG_EXT3_FS_SECURITY=y
CONFIG_JBD=y
# CONFIG_JBD_DEBUG is not set
CONFIG_FS_MBCACHE=y
# CONFIG_REISER4_FS is not set
# CONFIG_REISERFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_JFS_FS is not set
CONFIG_FS_POSIX_ACL=y

#
# XFS support
#
# CONFIG_XFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_OCFS2_FS is not set
# CONFIG_MINIX_FS is not set
# CONFIG_ROMFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_INOTIFY is not set
# CONFIG_QUOTA is not set
CONFIG_DNOTIFY=y
# CONFIG_AUTOFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_AUTOFS4_FS is not set

#
# Caches
#
# CONFIG_FSCACHE is not set
# CONFIG_FUSE_FS is not set

#
# CD-ROM/DVD Filesystems
#
# CONFIG_ISO9660_FS is not set
# CONFIG_UDF_FS is not set

#
# DOS/FAT/NT Filesystems
#
# CONFIG_MSDOS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_VFAT_FS is not set
# CONFIG_NTFS_FS is not set

#
# Pseudo filesystems
#
CONFIG_PROC_FS=y
CONFIG_PROC_KCORE=y
CONFIG_SYSFS=y
CONFIG_DEVPTS_FS_XATTR=y
CONFIG_DEVPTS_FS_SECURITY=y
CONFIG_TMPFS=y
# CONFIG_TMPFS_XATTR is not set
# CONFIG_HUGETLBFS is not set
# CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE is not set
CONFIG_RAMFS=y
# CONFIG_CONFIGFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_RELAYFS_FS is not set

#
# Miscellaneous filesystems
#
# CONFIG_ADFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_AFFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_ASFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_HFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_HFSPLUS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_BEFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_BFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_EFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_CRAMFS is not set
# CONFIG_VXFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_HPFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_QNX4FS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_SYSV_FS is not set
# CONFIG_UFS_FS is not set

#
# Network File Systems
#
# CONFIG_NFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_NFSD is not set
# CONFIG_SMB_FS is not set
# CONFIG_CIFS is not set
# CONFIG_NCP_FS is not set
# CONFIG_CODA_FS is not set
# CONFIG_AFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_9P_FS is not set

#
# Partition Types
#
# CONFIG_PARTITION_ADVANCED is not set
CONFIG_MSDOS_PARTITION=y

#
# Native Language Support
#
CONFIG_NLS=y
CONFIG_NLS_DEFAULT="iso8859-1"
CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_437=y
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_737 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_775 is not set
CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_850=y
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_852 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_855 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_857 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_860 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_861 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_862 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_863 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_864 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_865 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_866 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_869 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_936 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_950 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_932 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_949 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_874 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_8 is not set
CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_1250=y
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_1251 is not set
CONFIG_NLS_ASCII=y
CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_1=y
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_2 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_3 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_4 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_5 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_6 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_7 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_9 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_13 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_14 is not set
CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_15=y
# CONFIG_NLS_KOI8_R is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_KOI8_U is not set
CONFIG_NLS_UTF8=y

#
# Profiling support
#
# CONFIG_PROFILING is not set

#
# Kernel hacking
#
# CONFIG_PRINTK_TIME is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL is not set
CONFIG_LOG_BUF_SHIFT=14
CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE=y
CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK=y
CONFIG_X86_FIND_SMP_CONFIG=y
CONFIG_X86_MPPARSE=y

#
# Security options
#
# CONFIG_KEYS is not set
# CONFIG_SECURITY is not set

#
# Cryptographic options
#
# CONFIG_CRYPTO is not set

#
# Hardware crypto devices
#

#
# Library routines
#
# CONFIG_CRC_CCITT is not set
CONFIG_CRC32=m
# CONFIG_LIBCRC32C is not set
CONFIG_GENERIC_HARDIRQS=y
CONFIG_GENERIC_IRQ_PROBE=y
CONFIG_X86_BIOS_REBOOT=y
CONFIG_PC=y

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 00:49 +0200, Marc Ballarin wrote:
> - no daemons running

What kind of results do you get with a more realistic setup, like
running KDE or Gnome OOTB?

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Marc Ballarin]

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:15:42 -0400
Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:

> 
> What kind of results do you get with a more realistic setup, like
> running KDE or Gnome OOTB?
> 

Here are results with KDE running.

- no peripherals attached, i.e. truly mobile setup.
- all modules loaded
- klaptopdaemon disabled in order to eliminate competition in polling the
  already slow battery controller
- furthermore, I found that artsd prevents entering C3 and generally
  increases power consumption (ALSA, snd_intel8x0)
- voltage is 16.5V

Since the results aren't as stable as in the minimal setup (especially
with HZ=1000), I'll post raw numbers and averages:

HZ=100:                   HZ=1000:      DIFF:

1) averages:

backlight on, artsd off:
765.00                    812.12        42.12

backlight off, arstd off:
637.17                    679.67        42.5

backlight on, artsd on:
927.60                    933.33        5.73

backlight off, artsd on:
799.46                    806.13        6.67

2) raw numbers:

771 mA <= backlight on   801 mA <= backlight on
764 mA                   818 mA
763 mA                   832 mA
763 mA                   817 mA
764 mA                   796 mA
766 mA                   828 mA
764 mA                   831 mA
635 mA <= backlight off  824 mA
635 mA                   795 mA
635 mA                   801 mA
636 mA                   816 mA
636 mA                   797 mA
646 mA                   816 mA
638 mA                   799 mA
637 mA                   817 mA
639 mA                   801 mA
634 mA                   817 mA
637 mA                   668 mA <= backlight off
636 mA                   690 mA
637 mA                   671 mA
764 mA <= backlight on   692 mA
771 mA                   668 mA
929 mA <= artsd started  689 mA
924 mA                   673 mA
942 mA                   711 mA
927 mA                   668 mA
925 mA                   668 mA
926 mA                   689 mA
925 mA                   672 mA
926 mA                   677 mA
923 mA                   672 mA
929 mA                   689 mA
797 mA <= backlight off  672 mA
800 mA                   687 mA
800 mA                   669 mA
813 mA                   687 mA
799 mA                   673 mA
797 mA                   688 mA
798 mA                   668 mA
799 mA                   722 mA <= backlight on
800 mA                   833 mA <= artsd started
797 mA                   929 mA
799 mA                   928 mA
797 mA                   943 mA
797 mA                   929 mA
932 mA <= backlight on   947 mA
                         929 mA
                         929 mA
                         935 mA
                         928 mA
                         945 mA
                         929 mA
                         929 mA
                         809 mA  <= backlight off
                         799 mA
                         814 mA
                         799 mA
                         816 mA
                         799 mA
                         817 mA
                         799 mA
                         805 mA
                         799 mA
                         813 mA
                         800 mA
                         813 mA
                         800 mA
                         817 mA
                         799 mA
                         947 mA <= backlight on

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 12:06 +0200, Marc Ballarin wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:15:42 -0400
> Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > What kind of results do you get with a more realistic setup, like
> > running KDE or Gnome OOTB?
> > 
> 
> Here are results with KDE running.
> 
> - no peripherals attached, i.e. truly mobile setup.
> - all modules loaded
> - klaptopdaemon disabled in order to eliminate competition in polling the
>   already slow battery controller
> - furthermore, I found that artsd prevents entering C3 and generally
>   increases power consumption (ALSA, snd_intel8x0)
> - voltage is 16.5V

> HZ=100:                   HZ=1000:      DIFF:
> 
> 1) averages:
> 
> backlight off, arstd off:
> 637.17                    679.67        42.5

> backlight off, artsd on:
> 799.46                    806.13        6.67

So it looks like artsd wastes way more power DMAing a bunch of silent
pages to the sound card than HZ=1000.

There's nothing the ALSA layer can do about this, it's a KDE bug.

I think this is a good argument for leaving HZ at 1000 until some of
these userspace bugs are fixed.

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Zwane Mwaikambo]

On Sat, 30 Jul 2005, Lee Revell wrote:

> So it looks like artsd wastes way more power DMAing a bunch of silent
> pages to the sound card than HZ=1000.
> 
> There's nothing the ALSA layer can do about this, it's a KDE bug.
> 
> I think this is a good argument for leaving HZ at 1000 until some of
> these userspace bugs are fixed.

It's already 'fixed' just set artsd to release the sound device after some 
idle time. It's in the "Auto-Suspend" seection of the KDE sound system 
control module.

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 12:18 -0600, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jul 2005, Lee Revell wrote:
> 
> > So it looks like artsd wastes way more power DMAing a bunch of silent
> > pages to the sound card than HZ=1000.
> > 
> > There's nothing the ALSA layer can do about this, it's a KDE bug.
> > 
> > I think this is a good argument for leaving HZ at 1000 until some of
> > these userspace bugs are fixed.
> 
> It's already 'fixed' just set artsd to release the sound device after some 
> idle time. It's in the "Auto-Suspend" seection of the KDE sound system 
> control module.
> 

It's useless if not enabled by default.

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 12:18 -0600, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jul 2005, Lee Revell wrote:
> 
> > So it looks like artsd wastes way more power DMAing a bunch of silent
> > pages to the sound card than HZ=1000.
> > 
> > There's nothing the ALSA layer can do about this, it's a KDE bug.
> > 
> > I think this is a good argument for leaving HZ at 1000 until some of
> > these userspace bugs are fixed.
> 
> It's already 'fixed' just set artsd to release the sound device after some 
> idle time. It's in the "Auto-Suspend" seection of the KDE sound system 
> control module.

I suspect that the failure to enable this by default is a relic of the
pre-dmix era, when access to the sound device was exclusive, to prevent
another app from grabbing it in the interim.

Of course this behavior is completely unnecessary with ALSA 1.0.9 or
later, as the default PCM uses dmix so the above scenario would not
block the sound card.

Anyway, KDE does not need to release the sound device to prevent this.
Simply stopping the PCM should be enough.

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 12:18 -0600, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jul 2005, Lee Revell wrote:
> 
> > So it looks like artsd wastes way more power DMAing a bunch of silent

> It's already 'fixed' just set artsd to release the sound device after some 
> idle time. It's in the "Auto-Suspend" seection of the KDE sound system 
> control module.

Just to verify that this option works:

1. Using a non hardware mixing device intel8x0, set it to release the
sound device after 5 seconds.

2. In 10 seconds, use aplay or xmms (in ALSA mode, not artsd) to play a
sound.  

3. Then, while the sound is playing, do something that would make KDE
play a sound.

#2 should fail with -EBUSY and you should hear the #3 sound.  If #2
succeeds and #3 fails then KDE is broken IMHO.

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > What kind of results do you get with a more realistic setup, like
> > > running KDE or Gnome OOTB?
> > > 
> > 
> > Here are results with KDE running.
> > 
> > - no peripherals attached, i.e. truly mobile setup.
> > - all modules loaded
> > - klaptopdaemon disabled in order to eliminate competition in polling the
> >   already slow battery controller
> > - furthermore, I found that artsd prevents entering C3 and generally
> >   increases power consumption (ALSA, snd_intel8x0)
> > - voltage is 16.5V
> 
> > HZ=100:                   HZ=1000:      DIFF:
> > 
> > 1) averages:
> > 
> > backlight off, arstd off:
> > 637.17                    679.67        42.5
> 
> > backlight off, artsd on:
> > 799.46                    806.13        6.67
> 
> So it looks like artsd wastes way more power DMAing a bunch of silent
> pages to the sound card than HZ=1000.
> 
> There's nothing the ALSA layer can do about this, it's a KDE bug.
> 
> I think this is a good argument for leaving HZ at 1000 until some of
> these userspace bugs are fixed.

WTF? HZ=1000 eats energy like crazy. artsd eats energy like crazy. And
you advocate breaking kernel because artsd is broken?!
								Pavel
-- 
if you have sharp zaurus hardware you don't need... you know my address

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 21:51 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > I think this is a good argument for leaving HZ at 1000 until some of
> > these userspace bugs are fixed.
> 
> WTF? HZ=1000 eats energy like crazy. artsd eats energy like crazy. And
> you advocate breaking kernel because artsd is broken?!

Maybe I am showing my ignorance as a non-laptop user.  Is 6.67mW a
really big difference?

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > I think this is a good argument for leaving HZ at 1000 until some of
> > > these userspace bugs are fixed.
> > 
> > WTF? HZ=1000 eats energy like crazy. artsd eats energy like crazy. And
> > you advocate breaking kernel because artsd is broken?!
> 
> Maybe I am showing my ignorance as a non-laptop user.  Is 6.67mW a
> really big difference?

First numbers were 0.5W on idle system; that shows what kind of
powersaving can be done. Powersaving is no longer possible when artsd
is not running, but that should not be used as argument against it.

								Pavel
-- 
if you have sharp zaurus hardware you don't need... you know my address

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[James Bruce]

Pavel Machek wrote:
> First numbers were 0.5W on idle system; that shows what kind of
> powersaving can be done. Powersaving is no longer possible when artsd
> is not running, but that should not be used as argument against it.

It was an idle system with no display, zero daemons running, and the 
hard drive off.  In other words, a machine that nobody could use which 
might as well be hibrinating.  While it was an important test to find 
out the most one could hope to save, its unrealistic for an actual usage 
case.  The later test was more realistic, and not suprisingly showed 
quite a bit less power savings.

I really like having 250HZ as an _option_, but what I don't see is why 
it should be the _default_.  I believe this is Lee's position as well. 
Last I checked, ACPI and CPU speed scaling were not enabled by default; 
If users are willing to change all those other options, why can't we 
expect them to select 250HZ/100HZ?  Instead, we are quadrupling latency 
for desktop users (for little or no power savings), just so that laptop 
users can save enabling one option out of the many they already need to 
change.

I have a fixed-framerate app that had to busywait in the days of 2.4.x. 
  It was nice in 2.6.x to not have to busywait, but with 250HZ that code 
will be coming back again.  And unfortunately this app can't be made 
variable-framerate, as it is simulating video hardware.  The same goes 
for apps playing movies/animations; Sometimes programs just need a 
semi-accurate sleep, and can't demand root priveledges to get it.

I remember that 1000HZ was chosen in part so that fewer people would 
complain about the need for the Posix highres timers.  Well now that 
1000HZ is going away, can we have our highres timers or not?  My guess 
is no.  Thus we've predictably come back out here to complain.  All 
we're asking is that the default value be left alone until tick-skipping 
approaches and/or highres timers are given a chance to work.  That way 
we can see if we can find a solution that truly makes everyone happy.

In a sense I feel this whole thing boils down to the fact that we don't 
have something like "make laptop-config" and "make server-config".  I'm 
glad we could save 5.2% of the power for a laptop user by changing the 
defaults (as long as you remember to change other options too).  However 
I'm not sure it should come at the expense of those doing video or audio 
on a desktop.  Right now with the one-size-fits-all defaults, we end up 
having to make that tradeoff.

  - Jim Bruce

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> >First numbers were 0.5W on idle system; that shows what kind of
> >powersaving can be done. Powersaving is no longer possible when artsd
> >is not running, but that should not be used as argument against it.
> 
> It was an idle system with no display, zero daemons running, and the 
> hard drive off.  In other words, a machine that nobody could use which 
> might as well be hibrinating.  While it was an important test to find 
> out the most one could hope to save, its unrealistic for an actual usage 
> case.  The later test was more realistic, and not suprisingly showed 
> quite a bit less power savings.

Then the second test was probably flawed, possibly because we have
some more work to do. No display is irrelevant, HZ=100 will still save
0.5W with running display. Spinning disk also does not produce CPU
load (and we *will* want to have disk spinned down). No daemons... if
some daemon wakes every msec, we want to fix the daemon. 

> I really like having 250HZ as an _option_, but what I don't see is why 
> it should be the _default_.  I believe this is Lee's position as
> Last I checked, ACPI and CPU speed scaling were not enabled by default; 

Kernel defaults are irelevant; distros change them anyway. [But we
probably want to enable ACPI and cpufreq by default, because that
matches what 99% of users will use.]

> I have a fixed-framerate app that had to busywait in the days of 2.4.x. 
>  It was nice in 2.6.x to not have to busywait, but with 250HZ that code 
> will be coming back again.  And unfortunately this app can't be made 
> variable-framerate, as it is simulating video hardware.  The same goes 
> for apps playing movies/animations; Sometimes programs just need a 
> semi-accurate sleep, and can't demand root priveledges to get it.

I really don't think default HZ in kernel config is such a big
deal. You'll want to support HZ=100 on 2.6.X, anyway...

> In a sense I feel this whole thing boils down to the fact that we don't 
> have something like "make laptop-config" and "make server-config".  I'm 
> glad we could save 5.2% of the power for a laptop user by changing
> the 

defconfig on i386 is Linus' configuration. Maybe server-config and
laptop-config would be good idea...
								Pavel
-- 
if you have sharp zaurus hardware you don't need... you know my address

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 23:10 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> [But we
> probably want to enable ACPI and cpufreq by default, because that
> matches what 99% of users will use.]

Sorry, this is just ridiculous.  You're saying 99% of Linux
installations are laptops?  Bullshit.

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[James Bruce]

Lee Revell wrote:
 > On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 23:10 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
 >>[But we
 >>probably want to enable ACPI and cpufreq by default, because that
 >>matches what 99% of users will use.]
 >
 > Sorry, this is just ridiculous.  You're saying 99% of Linux
 > installations are laptops?  Bullshit.

I believe he's talking about the future (he did said "will").  All the 
new AMD64 desktop chips have powersaving now, and Intel chips either 
have it now or will soon.  With the power that desktop chips draw 
nowadays (some are 80+ watts at idle), it is an important consideration. 
  As for uptake, a realistic number would be probably be 90% in three years.

Of course regardless of that I'd still like to keep the 1msec sleep 
resolution...

  - Jim

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > [But we
> > probably want to enable ACPI and cpufreq by default, because that
> > matches what 99% of users will use.]
> 
> Sorry, this is just ridiculous.  You're saying 99% of Linux
> installations are laptops?  Bullshit.

No, I'm saying that 99% users enable ACPI and cpufreq. ACPI is needed
on new machines, and cpufreq is usefull to keep your desktop cold,
too.

								Pavel
-- 
if you have sharp zaurus hardware you don't need... you know my address

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Bernd Eckenfels]

In article <20050731223247.GA27580@elf.ucw.cz> you wrote:
> No, I'm saying that 99% users enable ACPI and cpufreq. ACPI is needed
> on new machines, and cpufreq is usefull to keep your desktop cold,
> too.

And with the recent ongoing packing of CPU cores into racks, it is even more
so important for Servers.

Gruss
Bernd

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Kyle Moffett]

On Jul 31, 2005, at 18:32:47, Pavel Machek wrote:

> and cpufreq is usefull to keep your desktop cold, too.
>

But I don't want my desktop cold!!!  That would ruin its usefulness as a
400W dorm space-heater!!! :-D

*starts boinc client running in the background*


Cheers,
Kyle Moffett

--
There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to  
make it so
simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other way is  
to make
it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies.  The first  
method is
far more difficult.
   -- C.A.R. Hoare

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Tomasz Torcz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 689 bytes --]

On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 05:41:31PM -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 23:10 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > [But we
> > probably want to enable ACPI and cpufreq by default, because that
> > matches what 99% of users will use.]
> 
> Sorry, this is just ridiculous.  You're saying 99% of Linux
> installations are laptops?  Bullshit.

 I'm not a laptop user, yet I'm using cpufreq on my Sempron 2500+.
cpufreq-nforce2 switching between 1,23 and 1,75 GHz makes 8-10 Celsius'
degrees difference on CPU temperature.

-- 
Tomasz Torcz            There exists no separation between gods and men:
zdzichu@irc.-nie.spam-.pl   one blends softly casual into the other.


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 229 bytes --]

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 23:10 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > I really like having 250HZ as an _option_, but what I don't see is why 
> > it should be the _default_.  I believe this is Lee's position as
> > Last I checked, ACPI and CPU speed scaling were not enabled by default; 
> 
> Kernel defaults are irelevant; distros change them anyway.

OK, so HZ should be left at 1000 so "make oldconfig" continues to do the
right thing.  It is supposed to give me my old config, right?

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 23:10 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> defconfig on i386 is Linus' configuration. Maybe server-config and
> laptop-config would be good idea...

Um, what about those things called "desktops"?  They're like a laptop
but with reasonable hard drive speeds and adult-sized keyboards?

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[James Bruce]

Lee Revell wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 23:10 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
>>defconfig on i386 is Linus' configuration. Maybe server-config and
>>laptop-config would be good idea...
> 
> Um, what about those things called "desktops"?  They're like a laptop
> but with reasonable hard drive speeds and adult-sized keyboards?

Pavel picked up that (incomplete) list up from my email, and I was just 
assuming defconfig to be the desktop config.  If that feature were done 
cleanly though, we could have any number of blah-configs, and maybe even 
split desktops into low-latency or low-resources options.  It'd be neat 
to get preempt and everything on just by saying:
   make desktop-lowlatency-config
Then again, maybe that idea will fly like pigs; we'll see.

  - Jim Bruce

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Jim Crilly]

On 07/31/05 11:10:20PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> 
> > I really like having 250HZ as an _option_, but what I don't see is why 
> > it should be the _default_.  I believe this is Lee's position as
> > Last I checked, ACPI and CPU speed scaling were not enabled by default; 
> 
> Kernel defaults are irelevant; distros change them anyway. [But we
> probably want to enable ACPI and cpufreq by default, because that
> matches what 99% of users will use.]
> 

If the kernel defaults are irrelevant, then it would make more sense to
leave the default HZ as 1000 and not to enable the cpufreq and ACPI in
order to keep with the principle of least surprise for people who do use
kernel.org kernels.

Jim.

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > I really like having 250HZ as an _option_, but what I don't see is why 
> > > it should be the _default_.  I believe this is Lee's position as
> > > Last I checked, ACPI and CPU speed scaling were not enabled by default; 
> > 
> > Kernel defaults are irelevant; distros change them anyway. [But we
> > probably want to enable ACPI and cpufreq by default, because that
> > matches what 99% of users will use.]
> > 
> 
> If the kernel defaults are irrelevant, then it would make more sense to
> leave the default HZ as 1000 and not to enable the cpufreq and ACPI in
> order to keep with the principle of least surprise for people who do use
> kernel.org kernels.

Well, I'd say you want ACPI enabled. New machine do not even boot
without that. Default config should be usefull; set ACPI off, and
you'll not be able to even power machine down.
								Pavel
-- 
if you have sharp zaurus hardware you don't need... you know my address

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 00:36 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > > I really like having 250HZ as an _option_, but what I don't see is why 
> > > > it should be the _default_.  I believe this is Lee's position as
> > > > Last I checked, ACPI and CPU speed scaling were not enabled by default; 
> > > 
> > > Kernel defaults are irelevant; distros change them anyway. [But we
> > > probably want to enable ACPI and cpufreq by default, because that
> > > matches what 99% of users will use.]
> > > 
> > 
> > If the kernel defaults are irrelevant, then it would make more sense to
> > leave the default HZ as 1000 and not to enable the cpufreq and ACPI in
> > order to keep with the principle of least surprise for people who do use
> > kernel.org kernels.
> 
> Well, I'd say you want ACPI enabled. New machine do not even boot
> without that. Default config should be usefull; set ACPI off, and
> you'll not be able to even power machine down.

While it's good to be future proof, I don't think it's valid to assume
that new kernels usually run on new hardware.

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Jim Crilly]

On 08/01/05 12:36:16AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > If the kernel defaults are irrelevant, then it would make more sense to
> > leave the default HZ as 1000 and not to enable the cpufreq and ACPI in
> > order to keep with the principle of least surprise for people who do use
> > kernel.org kernels.
> 
> Well, I'd say you want ACPI enabled. New machine do not even boot
> without that. Default config should be usefull; set ACPI off, and
> you'll not be able to even power machine down.

And there are older machines that won't boot with it enabled. The machine
I'm typing this on has a really shitty ACPI implementation, I don't remember
the details because it's been so long but I know that I have to disable ACPI 
for it to work right.

I'm not saying defconfig should never be changed, but changing what can and
will cause noticeable breakage should be avoided if possible. And in this
case it doesn't seem to me that the benefits of changing HZ in the middle
of a "stable" series outweigh the added latency.

> 								Pavel

Jim.

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > If the kernel defaults are irrelevant, then it would make more sense to
> > > leave the default HZ as 1000 and not to enable the cpufreq and ACPI in
> > > order to keep with the principle of least surprise for people who do use
> > > kernel.org kernels.
> > 
> > Well, I'd say you want ACPI enabled. New machine do not even boot
> > without that. Default config should be usefull; set ACPI off, and
> > you'll not be able to even power machine down.
> 
> And there are older machines that won't boot with it enabled. The machine
> I'm typing this on has a really shitty ACPI implementation, I don't remember
> the details because it's been so long but I know that I have to disable ACPI 
> for it to work right.

If it was long ago, you probably want to try again and file a bug
report if still broken.

								Pavel

-- 
if you have sharp zaurus hardware you don't need... you know my address

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Jim Crilly]

On 08/01/05 09:26:00AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > 
> > And there are older machines that won't boot with it enabled. The machine
> > I'm typing this on has a really shitty ACPI implementation, I don't remember
> > the details because it's been so long but I know that I have to disable ACPI 
> > for it to work right.
> 
> If it was long ago, you probably want to try again and file a bug
> report if still broken.

I may do that, but I don't need ACPI on the machine so I've just always
disabled it and figured it was a BIOS problem that won't be fixed since
there have been no BIOS updates for this board since '03.

> 								Pavel

Jim.

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Bill Davidsen]

Jim Crilly wrote:
> On 07/31/05 11:10:20PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> 
>>>I really like having 250HZ as an _option_, but what I don't see is why 
>>>it should be the _default_.  I believe this is Lee's position as
>>>Last I checked, ACPI and CPU speed scaling were not enabled by default; 
>>
>>Kernel defaults are irelevant; distros change them anyway. [But we
>>probably want to enable ACPI and cpufreq by default, because that
>>matches what 99% of users will use.]
>>
> 
> 
> If the kernel defaults are irrelevant, then it would make more sense to
> leave the default HZ as 1000 and not to enable the cpufreq and ACPI in
> order to keep with the principle of least surprise for people who do use
> kernel.org kernels.
> 
> Jim.

Thank you Jim, Plauger's "law of least astonishment."

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[James Bruce]

Pavel Machek wrote:
> Then the second test was probably flawed, possibly because we have
> some more work to do. No display is irrelevant, HZ=100 will still save
> 0.5W with running display. Spinning disk also does not produce CPU
> load (and we *will* want to have disk spinned down). No daemons... if
> some daemon wakes every msec, we want to fix the daemon. 

I was talking about percentage saved; That 5.2% easily drops below 2% 
once other things start sucking up power.  I was thinking that way since 
the percentage saved is what determines the overall battery life 
increase.  You're right in that the absolute power draw difference 
should stay the same, and that seems to be the case is Marc's tests 
(ignoring the brokenness of artsd).

> Kernel defaults are irelevant; distros change them anyway. [But we
> probably want to enable ACPI and cpufreq by default, because that
> matches what 99% of users will use.]

True, but I think a lot of distros treat the values as recommendations. 
  I guess we'll find out what they do with this option soon enough.

>>I have a fixed-framerate app that had to busywait in the days of 2.4.x. 
>> It was nice in 2.6.x to not have to busywait, but with 250HZ that code 
>>will be coming back again.  And unfortunately this app can't be made 
>>variable-framerate, as it is simulating video hardware.  The same goes 
>>for apps playing movies/animations; Sometimes programs just need a 
>>semi-accurate sleep, and can't demand root priveledges to get it.
> 
> I really don't think default HZ in kernel config is such a big
> deal. You'll want to support HZ=100 on 2.6.X, anyway...

Yeah, but if its only the default value for servers and laptops they 
won't normally be running my app.  I'll be truly happy the day I can 
delete all the busy-waiting code, as I think its about the ugliest 
workaround in modern computing.

> defconfig on i386 is Linus' configuration. Maybe server-config and
> laptop-config would be good idea...

Well maybe if we can get enough people who agree then it could happen. 
I think a "laptop-config" and "server-config" file could fit nicely into 
the current arch/*/config/ directory structure.  I'm not sure how those 
defconfig files are kept up to date though.

  - Jim

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> >Then the second test was probably flawed, possibly because we have
> >some more work to do. No display is irrelevant, HZ=100 will still save
> >0.5W with running display. Spinning disk also does not produce CPU
> >load (and we *will* want to have disk spinned down). No daemons... if
> >some daemon wakes every msec, we want to fix the daemon. 
> 
> I was talking about percentage saved; That 5.2% easily drops below 2% 
> once other things start sucking up power.  I was thinking that way since 
> the percentage saved is what determines the overall battery life 
> increase.  You're right in that the absolute power draw difference 
> should stay the same, and that seems to be the case is Marc's tests 
> (ignoring the brokenness of artsd).

You are right at that, but .5W is still about as much as hard disk
spinning. And newer CPUs are likely to benefit more from HZ=100.

> >Kernel defaults are irelevant; distros change them anyway. [But we
> >probably want to enable ACPI and cpufreq by default, because that
> >matches what 99% of users will use.]
> 
> True, but I think a lot of distros treat the values as recommendations. 
>  I guess we'll find out what they do with this option soon enough.

I'm pretty sure at least one distro will go with HZ<300 real soon now
;-).

								Pavel
-- 
if you have sharp zaurus hardware you don't need... you know my address

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 00:47 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> I'm pretty sure at least one distro will go with HZ<300 real soon now
> ;-).
> 

Any idea what their official recommendation for people running apps that
require the 1ms sleep resolution is?  Something along the lines of "Get
bent"?

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > I'm pretty sure at least one distro will go with HZ<300 real soon now
> > ;-).
> > 
> 
> Any idea what their official recommendation for people running apps that
> require the 1ms sleep resolution is?  Something along the lines of "Get
> bent"?

So you busy wait for 1msec, big deal. Some machines can't even keep
time properly with HZ=1000. Official recommendation is likely "help us
with CONFIG_NO_IDLE_HZ" or "get over it".
								Pavel
-- 
if you have sharp zaurus hardware you don't need... you know my address

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 01:29 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > I'm pretty sure at least one distro will go with HZ<300 real soon now
> > > ;-).
> > > 
> > 
> > Any idea what their official recommendation for people running apps that
> > require the 1ms sleep resolution is?  Something along the lines of "Get
> > bent"?
> 
> So you busy wait for 1msec, big deal.

Which requires changing all those apps.  I thought we tried not to break
userspace with minor kernel version upgrades.

> Some machines can't even keep time properly with HZ=1000.

If your workaround for broken hardware involves screwing over people
with good hardware, it might be the wrong workaround.

>  Official recommendation is likely "help us
> with CONFIG_NO_IDLE_HZ" or "get over it".

IOW, "if you don't like it, get another distro, or compile your own
kernel".

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > > I'm pretty sure at least one distro will go with HZ<300 real soon now
> > > > ;-).
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Any idea what their official recommendation for people running apps that
> > > require the 1ms sleep resolution is?  Something along the lines of "Get
> > > bent"?
> > 
> > So you busy wait for 1msec, big deal.
> 
> Which requires changing all those apps.  

...which you have to do anyway for 2.4 compatibility.
								Pavel
-- 
if you have sharp zaurus hardware you don't need... you know my address

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Bill Davidsen]

Lee Revell wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 01:29 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> 
>>Hi!
>>
>>
>>>>I'm pretty sure at least one distro will go with HZ<300 real soon now
>>>>;-).
>>>>
>>>
>>>Any idea what their official recommendation for people running apps that
>>>require the 1ms sleep resolution is?  Something along the lines of "Get
>>>bent"?
>>
>>So you busy wait for 1msec, big deal.
> 
> 
> Which requires changing all those apps.  I thought we tried not to break
> userspace with minor kernel version upgrades.

Sounds like you were wrong.

This whole thing is silly, I'm very aware of battery life issues, but in 
real ues we are talking about maybe 3% more battery life. People who are 
totally anal about it will build their own kernel, or use a vendor 
kernel with varioble tick rate, but saving <2BTU/hr is not going to let 
anyone buy a smaller A/C unit. The computer user gives off way more than 
that.

I would leave it at 1k and push for variable tick, which should make 
everyone happy.
> 
> 
>>Some machines can't even keep time properly with HZ=1000.
> 
> 
> If your workaround for broken hardware involves screwing over people
> with good hardware, it might be the wrong workaround.
> 
> 
>> Official recommendation is likely "help us
>>with CONFIG_NO_IDLE_HZ" or "get over it".
> 
> 
> IOW, "if you don't like it, get another distro, or compile your own
> kernel".
> 
> Lee
> 

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Stefan Seyfried]

Lee Revell wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 00:47 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure at least one distro will go with HZ<300 real soon now
>> ;-).
>> 
> 
> Any idea what their official recommendation for people running apps that
> require the 1ms sleep resolution is?  Something along the lines of "Get
> bent"?

MPlayer is using /dev/rtc and was running smooth for me since the good
old 2.4 days.
-- 
Stefan Seyfried

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Jan Knutar]

On Monday 01 August 2005 09:19, Stefan Seyfried wrote:

> > Any idea what their official recommendation for people running apps that
> > require the 1ms sleep resolution is?  Something along the lines of "Get
> > bent"?
> 
> MPlayer is using /dev/rtc and was running smooth for me since the good
> old 2.4 days.

MPlayer cares more about unbroken sound drivers, since the video needs
to run at the speed of your sound boards oscillator if you don't want sound
and video to run at different rates.
Unfortunately people use an almost random mix of alsa, alsa-lib and .asoundrc
setups, including me, mplayer through dmix is one jitter-fest, mplayer straight
to the alsa pcm device works better, but of course using the oss emulation
seems to work best of all :-)

I never noticed any difference during 2.4 between using rtc and not using rtc.

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 19:07 +0300, Jan Knutar wrote:
> MPlayer cares more about unbroken sound drivers, since the video needs
> to run at the speed of your sound boards oscillator if you don't want sound
> and video to run at different rates.
> Unfortunately people use an almost random mix of alsa, alsa-lib and .asoundrc
> setups, including me, mplayer through dmix is one jitter-fest, mplayer straight
> to the alsa pcm device works better, but of course using the oss emulation
> seems to work best of all :-)

Because mplayer's ALSA code is broken.

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Tomasz Torcz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 876 bytes --]

On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 08:19:42AM +0200, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
> Lee Revell wrote:
> > On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 00:47 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >> I'm pretty sure at least one distro will go with HZ<300 real soon now
> >> ;-).
> >> 
> > 
> > Any idea what their official recommendation for people running apps that
> > require the 1ms sleep resolution is?  Something along the lines of "Get
> > bent"?
> 
> MPlayer is using /dev/rtc and was running smooth for me since the good
> old 2.4 days.

 VMware also uses /dev/rtc. So is NTP, which is needed when time drifts.
But they can't use /dev/rtc simultanously, as it's single-open device.
So running ntpd denies vmware and mplayer access to RTC. Bummer.

-- 
Tomasz Torcz            There exists no separation between gods and men:
zdzichu@irc.-nie.spam-.pl   one blends softly casual into the other.


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 229 bytes --]

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 11:13 +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 08:19:42AM +0200, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
> > Lee Revell wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 00:47 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > >> I'm pretty sure at least one distro will go with HZ<300 real soon now
> > >> ;-).
> > >> 
> > > 
> > > Any idea what their official recommendation for people running apps that
> > > require the 1ms sleep resolution is?  Something along the lines of "Get
> > > bent"?
> > 
> > MPlayer is using /dev/rtc and was running smooth for me since the good
> > old 2.4 days.
> 
>  VMware also uses /dev/rtc. So is NTP, which is needed when time drifts.
> But they can't use /dev/rtc simultanously, as it's single-open device.
> So running ntpd denies vmware and mplayer access to RTC. Bummer.
> 

You could work around this to some extent by using the ALSA timer API
with the RTC timer.  I think this allows multiple open by setting the
RTC to tick based on the lowest common denominator.  It won't help
vmware and NTP though.

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[David Weinehall]

On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 07:23:54PM -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 00:47 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > I'm pretty sure at least one distro will go with HZ<300 real soon now
> > ;-).
> > 
> 
> Any idea what their official recommendation for people running apps that
> require the 1ms sleep resolution is?  Something along the lines of "Get
> bent"?

Calm down.  Any argument along the lines of the change of a default
value in the defconfig screwing people over equally applies the other
way around; by not changing the defconfig, you're screwing laptop users
(and others that want less power consumption) over.  The world is not
black and white, it's a very boring gray (or a very sadening bloody
red; but I hope we won't come to that point just because of a silly
argument on lkml...)

In the end, Linus will decide this anyway.  I can understand that you
don't want to change your application.  Help developing the dynamic
tick patch, and maybe you won't have to =)


Regards: David Weinehall
-- 
 /) David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /) Northern lights wander      (\
//  Maintainer of the v2.0 kernel   //  Dance across the winter sky //
\)  http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/    (/   Full colour fire           (/

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[James Bruce]

David Weinehall wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 07:23:54PM -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
>>Any idea what their official recommendation for people running apps that
>>require the 1ms sleep resolution is?  Something along the lines of "Get
>>bent"?
> 
> Calm down.

Yes, Lee needs to chill a bit.  I'll hopefully explain our position 
calmly enough below.

> Any argument along the lines of the change of a default
> value in the defconfig screwing people over equally applies the other
> way around; by not changing the defconfig, you're screwing laptop users
> (and others that want less power consumption) over.  The world is not
> black and white, it's a very boring gray (or a very sadening bloody
> red; but I hope we won't come to that point just because of a silly
> argument on lkml...)

The tradeoff is a realistic 4.4% power savings vs a 300% increase in the 
minimum sleep period.  A user will see zero power savings if they have a 
USB mouse (probably 99% of desktops).  On top of that, we can throw in 
Con's disturbing AV benchmark results (1).  As a result, some of us 
don't think 250HZ is a great tradeoff to make _for_the_default_value_.

(1) http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/319124/

> In the end, Linus will decide this anyway.  I can understand that you
> don't want to change your application.  Help developing the dynamic
> tick patch, and maybe you won't have to =)

 From what I can tell, tick skipping works fine right now, it just needs 
some cleanup.  Thus I'd expect something like it will get integrated 
into 2.6.14.  If it gets in, the default HZ should go back up to 1000. 
In that case why decrease it for exactly one patchlevel?

As an app programmer, it'd be nice not to have to support 2.6.13 
differently from 2.6.(x!=13).  For my app, busy waiting means a ~12% 
load increase for 2.6.13 compared to (probably) all other 2.6 kernel 
versions.  That's certainly violating the principle of least surprise. 
Up to now, it was easy enough to tell people "upgrade from 2.4.x and 
it'll work better".  Now it gets more complicated.

Finally, as a conspiracy theorist, I wonder if Linus is just playing us 
to get more people working on the tick skipping and highres timer 
patches.  Someone with the ability to herd cats obviously has to be 
sneaky.  As an impressive demonstration of my free will I'm going to go 
test dyntick on my VIA Epia board...

  - Jim Bruce

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 12:18 -0400, James Bruce wrote:
> Yes, Lee needs to chill a bit.  I'll hopefully explain our position 
> calmly enough below.

I am a bit frustrated because when I first objected to 250HZ as the
default, I was told to come up with some numbers.  Now we have the
numbers, and they overwhelmingly show that 250HZ WILL hurt interactivity
and WILL NOT save anyone any power in real life.  But now the 250HZ
people have changed their position to "yes, we KNOW we're screwing over
multimedia users for the sake of laptop users, and we DON'T CARE about
your numbers."

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Theodore Ts'o]

On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 12:18:18PM -0400, James Bruce wrote:
> 
> The tradeoff is a realistic 4.4% power savings vs a 300% increase in the 
> minimum sleep period.  A user will see zero power savings if they have a 
> USB mouse (probably 99% of desktops).  On top of that, we can throw in 
> Con's disturbing AV benchmark results (1).  As a result, some of us 
> don't think 250HZ is a great tradeoff to make _for_the_default_value_.

Most laptops (including mine, a Thinkpad T40) use a PS/2 mouse.  So in
the places where power consumption savins matters most, it's usually
quite possible to function without needing any USB devices.  The 90%
figure isn't at all right; in fact, it may be that over 90% of the
laptops still use PS/2 mice and keyboards.

						- Ted

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[James Bruce]

Theodore Ts'o wrote:
 > On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 12:18:18PM -0400, James Bruce wrote:
 >>The tradeoff is a realistic 4.4% power savings vs a 300% increase in
 >>the minimum sleep period.  A user will see zero power savings if they
 >>have a USB mouse (probably 99% of desktops).  On top of that, we can
                                     ^^^^^^^^

 > Most laptops (including mine, a Thinkpad T40) use a PS/2 mouse.  So in
 > the places where power consumption savins matters most, it's usually
 > quite possible to function without needing any USB devices.  The 90%
 > figure isn't at all right; in fact, it may be that over 90% of the
 > laptops still use PS/2 mice and keyboards.

Yes, laptops are mostly PS/2, which is why I only claimed a statistic 
for desktops.  Desktops pretty much all use USB mice now.  If 250Hz were 
only being sold as an option for laptops, we could leave it at that, yet 
its being pushed as a default that's "good for everyone".  For desktops 
this is not currently true at all.  By the time USB is fixed to do power 
saving, we'll probably have a working tick-skipping patch which makes 
the whole HZ argument moot.

  - Jim Bruce

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Stephen Clark]

James Bruce wrote:

>Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 12:18:18PM -0400, James Bruce wrote:
> >>The tradeoff is a realistic 4.4% power savings vs a 300% increase in
> >>the minimum sleep period.  A user will see zero power savings if they
> >>have a USB mouse (probably 99% of desktops).  On top of that, we can
>                                     ^^^^^^^^
>
> > Most laptops (including mine, a Thinkpad T40) use a PS/2 mouse.  So in
> > the places where power consumption savins matters most, it's usually
> > quite possible to function without needing any USB devices.  The 90%
> > figure isn't at all right; in fact, it may be that over 90% of the
> > laptops still use PS/2 mice and keyboards.
>
>Yes, laptops are mostly PS/2, which is why I only claimed a statistic 
>for desktops.  Desktops pretty much all use USB mice now.  If 250Hz were 
>only being sold as an option for laptops, we could leave it at that, yet 
>its being pushed as a default that's "good for everyone".  For desktops 
>this is not currently true at all.  By the time USB is fixed to do power 
>saving, we'll probably have a working tick-skipping patch which makes 
>the whole HZ argument moot.
>
>  - Jim Bruce
>
>  
>
Maybe new desktop systems - but what about the tens of millions of old 
systems that don't.

Steve

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 09:10 -0400, Stephen Clark wrote:
> Maybe new desktop systems - but what about the tens of millions of old
> systems that don't.
> 

Does anyone really give a shit about saving power on the desktop anyway?
This is basically a laptop issue.

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Jens Axboe]

On Tue, Aug 02 2005, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 09:10 -0400, Stephen Clark wrote:
> > Maybe new desktop systems - but what about the tens of millions of old
> > systems that don't.
> > 
> 
> Does anyone really give a shit about saving power on the desktop anyway?
> This is basically a laptop issue.

Eh yes, very much.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Folkert van Heusden]

> > > Maybe new desktop systems - but what about the tens of millions of old
> > > systems that don't.
> > 
> > Does anyone really give a shit about saving power on the desktop anyway?
> > This is basically a laptop issue.
> 
> Eh yes, very much.

Indeed. Safe the environment etc.


Folkert van Heusden

-- 
Auto te koop, zie: http://www.vanheusden.com/daihatsu.php
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Get your PGP/GPG key signed at www.biglumber.com!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[linux-os (Dick Johnson)]

On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, Folkert van Heusden wrote:

>>>> Maybe new desktop systems - but what about the tens of millions of old
>>>> systems that don't.
>>>
>>> Does anyone really give a shit about saving power on the desktop anyway?
>>> This is basically a laptop issue.
>>
>> Eh yes, very much.
>
> Indeed. Safe the environment etc.
>
>
> Folkert van Heusden

Computers are nearly 100% efficient as heaters. A computer that
consumes 100 watts of power puts out a few milliwatts over a
network connection. The rest is heat. For every watt of heat,
it takes about 1/8th watt to carry the heat away with modern
air-conditioners.

So, just my 100 watt "heater" will cost me about US$18.00 per
month if I leave it on continuously. I read somewhere, I
think in "Communications", that at any one time there are
40 million personal computers "connected" to the Internet.
That's 40,000,000 * 18.00 = US$720,000,000.00 per month
being consumed, plus the 720,000,000 / 8 = US$90,000,000 to
keep them cool.

It's a MONEY problem, something everybody can understand.
It's not an environmental problem at all. The environment
can certainly sink the 40,000,000 * 100 = 4,000,000,000
(4 billion) watts of power. That's about the sun's energy
falling on a 10 km^2 area of land near the equator, a
drop in the bucket.

Ideally, a computer that's not doing any work should not
consume any power. However, even if you use static RAM
and a low-power CPU, computers have always been power
sinks. Recent GHz "advances" have upped the power loss
to unprecedented amounts. Anything that can help ameliorate
the problem will certainly be appreciated by "the masses".


Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.6.12 on an i686 machine (5537.79 BogoMips).
Warning : 98.36% of all statistics are fiction.
.
I apologize for the following. I tried to kill it with the above dot :

****************************************************************
The information transmitted in this message is confidential and may be privileged.  Any review, retransmission, dissemination, or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please notify Analogic Corporation immediately - by replying to this message or by sending an email to DeliveryErrors@analogic.com - and destroy all copies of this information, including any attachments, without reading or disclosing them.

Thank you.

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 13:45 -0400, linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote:
> It's a MONEY problem, something everybody can understand.
> It's not an environmental problem at all.

It is a huge environmental problem if you're burning fossil fuels to
generate that power.

Anyway I didn't mean there's no point trying to save power on the
desktop, just that it doesn't seem to be a big concern on LKML.  100% of
the arguments I've heard (before posting the above comment) were from
the laptop perspective.

Now that it's clear that dynamic tick will be ready soon, this thread
has outlived its usefulness, I'd like to let it die.

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Con Kolivas]

On Wed, 3 Aug 2005 00:02, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 09:10 -0400, Stephen Clark wrote:
> > Maybe new desktop systems - but what about the tens of millions of old
> > systems that don't.
>
> Does anyone really give a shit about saving power on the desktop anyway?
> This is basically a laptop issue.

Heat has become for Prescott, and will be for every upcoming chipset of the 
future, a major issue. So yes it will be relevant to everyone.

Cheers,
Con

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lars Marowsky-Bree]

On 2005-08-02T10:02:59, Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:

> > Maybe new desktop systems - but what about the tens of millions of old
> > systems that don't.
> Does anyone really give a shit about saving power on the desktop anyway?
> This is basically a laptop issue.

Desktops? Screw desktops. (Unless of course you're one of those
environmental friendly guys, but then you probably are simply too cheap
to buy a SUV too!)

But rather think "data center".

Those guys want maximum cycles per watt. One way of getting there is
using less watts when we don't use all cycles. This bring down power
consumption, which directly brings down heat production, which brings
down A/C needs.

Everyone wants to save power.


-- 
High Availability & Clustering
SUSE Labs, Research and Development
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - A Novell Business	 -- Charles Darwin
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 16:20 +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> then you probably are simply too cheap
> to buy a SUV too

I have not driven a car since 2001.

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Joel Jaeggli]

On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
>
> But rather think "data center".

The difference between using our idle cpu cycles for seti@home or just 
leaving the xeons and opterons idle when they're not crunching away is 
around $1300 a month (yes, I know it's a big datacenter) slightly more 
than half that, is the cooling used to remove the heat generated by the 
machines. the rest is the machines themselves.

> Those guys want maximum cycles per watt. One way of getting there is
> using less watts when we don't use all cycles. This bring down power
> consumption, which directly brings down heat production, which brings
> down A/C needs.

Why pay for power you don't need to use. Why pay for a ups thats bigger 
then it has to be. Why pay for more hvac then you need. Even now an idle 
rack of dual opterons 244s is something like 4-5kw, busy is more like 
6.8-8kw.

> Everyone wants to save power.

or lower their costs, or both.

>
>

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joel Jaeggli  	       Unix Consulting 	       joelja@darkwing.uoregon.edu
GPG Key Fingerprint:     5C6E 0104 BAF0 40B0 5BD3 C38B F000 35AB B67F 56B2

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Oliver Neukum]

Am Dienstag, 2. August 2005 16:20 schrieben Sie:
> On 2005-08-02T10:02:59, Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:
> 
> > > Maybe new desktop systems - but what about the tens of millions of old
> > > systems that don't.
> > Does anyone really give a shit about saving power on the desktop anyway?
> > This is basically a laptop issue.
> 
> Desktops? Screw desktops. (Unless of course you're one of those
> environmental friendly guys, but then you probably are simply too cheap
> to buy a SUV too!)

Not fully true. To many desktop people power control means noise control.
And that is important.

	Regards
		Oliver

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Jeff Garzik]

Lee Revell wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 09:10 -0400, Stephen Clark wrote:
> 
>>Maybe new desktop systems - but what about the tens of millions of old
>>systems that don't.
>>
> 
> 
> Does anyone really give a shit about saving power on the desktop anyway?
> This is basically a laptop issue.


Power consumption matters to server, desktop, and laptop.

Assuming this is a laptop issue is wildly incorrect.

	Jeff

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 10:43 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Lee Revell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 09:10 -0400, Stephen Clark wrote:
> > 
> >>Maybe new desktop systems - but what about the tens of millions of old
> >>systems that don't.
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > Does anyone really give a shit about saving power on the desktop anyway?
> > This is basically a laptop issue.
> 
> 
> Power consumption matters to server, desktop, and laptop.
> 
> Assuming this is a laptop issue is wildly incorrect.

I would think you'd get the best power/performance ration from a desktop
by just having it suspend after 5 or 10 minutes of idle time.

Oh well, I'll shut up, I've already demonstrated a complete ignorance of
new hardware.

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lars Marowsky-Bree]

On 2005-08-02T10:52:00, Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:

> > Power consumption matters to server, desktop, and laptop.
> > 
> > Assuming this is a laptop issue is wildly incorrect.
> 
> I would think you'd get the best power/performance ration from a desktop
> by just having it suspend after 5 or 10 minutes of idle time.
> 
> Oh well, I'll shut up, I've already demonstrated a complete ignorance of
> new hardware.

Lee, that is a very impressive statement to make in public, and not many
people are capable of admitting that they were wrong, or that their
focus has been too narrow. It's great to see this discussion has proven
instructing to you.



Sincerely,
    Lars Marowsky-Brée <lmb@suse.de>

-- 
High Availability & Clustering
SUSE Labs, Research and Development
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - A Novell Business	 -- Charles Darwin
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[James Bruce]

Stephen Clark wrote:
> Maybe new desktop systems - but what about the tens of millions of old 
> systems that don't.

If it's an old system, it probably doesn't have working ACPI C-states 
though.  Without that, low HZ does not save you anything.  I should have 
said: 99% of desktops with the capability to do ACPI sleep have at least 
one USB device attached (usually a mouse).

I do like saving power, which is why I run cpu frequency scaling on 
every machine I have that supports it.  I'm happy because it does its 
savings without negatively impacting latency or high-load performance. 
By 2.6.14 dyntick should give us the same thing for HZ, which is why I 
think changing the maximum value now doesn't make sense.

  - Jim Bruce

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 11:42 -0400, James Bruce wrote:
> I do like saving power, which is why I run cpu frequency scaling on 
> every machine I have that supports it.

My Athlon XP desktop doesn't support frequency scaling but has working
ACPI C-states (at least under Windows) so will run as cool as 31C when
idle (with the CPUIdle utility).  Most of the heat comes from the hard
drives anyway, but that's a different story.

This seems pretty cool to me, how much more power does frequency scaling
save over that, assuming you suspend after 5-10 minutes of inactivity
anyway?

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Prakash Punnoor]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1026 bytes --]

Lee Revell schrieb:
> On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 11:42 -0400, James Bruce wrote:
> 
>>I do like saving power, which is why I run cpu frequency scaling on 
>>every machine I have that supports it.
> 
> 
> My Athlon XP desktop doesn't support frequency scaling but has working
> ACPI C-states (at least under Windows) so will run as cool as 31C when
> idle (with the CPUIdle utility).  Most of the heat comes from the hard
> drives anyway, but that's a different story.
> 
> This seems pretty cool to me, how much more power does frequency scaling
> save over that, assuming you suspend after 5-10 minutes of inactivity
> anyway?

I am a gentoo user an compile a lot of things. I also use freq scaling with my
Athlon XP on nforce2 with cpu disconnect enabled.

idle at ~1400MHz:      ~135 WATT used by system
full load at ~1400MHz: ~150 WATT
full load at ~2200MHz: ~230 WATT

So, if I don't need something very quickly, so can guess that I prefer to do
compiling at low clock speeds... (Suspend won't work for me.)

Cheers,

Prakash

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Ondrej Zary]

James Bruce wrote:
> Stephen Clark wrote:
> 
>> Maybe new desktop systems - but what about the tens of millions of old 
>> systems that don't.
> 
> 
> If it's an old system, it probably doesn't have working ACPI C-states 
> though.  Without that, low HZ does not save you anything.  I should have 
> said: 99% of desktops with the capability to do ACPI sleep have at least 
> one USB device attached (usually a mouse).

rainbow@pentium:~$ cat /proc/acpi/processor/CPU0/power
active state:            C2
max_cstate:              C8
bus master activity:     00000000
states:
     C1:                  type[C1] promotion[C2] demotion[--] 
latency[000] usage[00052470]
    *C2:                  type[C2] promotion[--] demotion[C1] 
latency[090] usage[02699149]


This is PCPartner TXB820DS motherboard (Socket 7, i430TX) with 1998 
Award BIOS and C-states seem to work fine. I've tested it in Windows 98 
some time ago - the CPU is almost cold when idle with ACPI enabled and 
hot with ACPI disabled (that's partly caused by the fact that Windows 9x 
does not HLT the CPU when idle). With Pentium 100MHz in the socket and 
ACPI enabled, I could even touch the CPU (without heatsink) without 
burning my fingers.

-- 
Ondrej Zary

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[James Bruce]

Ondrej Zary wrote:
> James Bruce wrote:
>> Stephen Clark wrote:
>>> Maybe new desktop systems - but what about the tens of millions of 
>>> old systems that don't.
>>
>> If it's an old system, it probably doesn't have working ACPI C-states 
>> though.  Without that, low HZ does not save you anything.  I should 
>> have said: 99% of desktops with the capability to do ACPI sleep have 
>> at least one USB device attached (usually a mouse).
>
> rainbow@pentium:~$ cat /proc/acpi/processor/CPU0/power
> active state:            C2
> max_cstate:              C8
> bus master activity:     00000000
> states:
>     C1:                  type[C1] promotion[C2] demotion[--] 
> latency[000] usage[00052470]
>    *C2:                  type[C2] promotion[--] demotion[C1] 
> latency[090] usage[02699149]
> 
> This is PCPartner TXB820DS motherboard (Socket 7, i430TX) with 1998 
> Award BIOS and C-states seem to work fine. I've tested it in Windows 98 
> some time ago - the CPU is almost cold when idle with ACPI enabled and 
> hot with ACPI disabled (that's partly caused by the fact that Windows 9x 
> does not HLT the CPU when idle). With Pentium 100MHz in the socket and 
> ACPI enabled, I could even touch the CPU (without heatsink) without 
> burning my fingers.

Ok I stand corrected, I had no idea there were machines that old where 
ACPI worked correctly in Linux.

Do you see the same kind of heat reduction in Linux as Win98?  What HZ 
value are you using, as the latency for entering C2 on your machine 
looks pretty substantial (Your C2 almost looks like a new machine's C3 
state, which is supposedly the first level where substantial power 
savings occur on a new machines).

  - Jim Bruce

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Ondrej Zary]

James Bruce wrote:
> Ondrej Zary wrote:
> 
>> James Bruce wrote:
>>
>>> Stephen Clark wrote:
>>>
>>>> Maybe new desktop systems - but what about the tens of millions of 
>>>> old systems that don't.
>>>
>>>
>>> If it's an old system, it probably doesn't have working ACPI C-states 
>>> though.  Without that, low HZ does not save you anything.  I should 
>>> have said: 99% of desktops with the capability to do ACPI sleep have 
>>> at least one USB device attached (usually a mouse).
>>
>>
>> rainbow@pentium:~$ cat /proc/acpi/processor/CPU0/power
>> active state:            C2
>> max_cstate:              C8
>> bus master activity:     00000000
>> states:
>>     C1:                  type[C1] promotion[C2] demotion[--] 
>> latency[000] usage[00052470]
>>    *C2:                  type[C2] promotion[--] demotion[C1] 
>> latency[090] usage[02699149]
>>
>> This is PCPartner TXB820DS motherboard (Socket 7, i430TX) with 1998 
>> Award BIOS and C-states seem to work fine. I've tested it in Windows 
>> 98 some time ago - the CPU is almost cold when idle with ACPI enabled 
>> and hot with ACPI disabled (that's partly caused by the fact that 
>> Windows 9x does not HLT the CPU when idle). With Pentium 100MHz in the 
>> socket and ACPI enabled, I could even touch the CPU (without heatsink) 
>> without burning my fingers.
> 
> 
> Ok I stand corrected, I had no idea there were machines that old where 
> ACPI worked correctly in Linux.
> 
> Do you see the same kind of heat reduction in Linux as Win98?  What HZ 
> value are you using, as the latency for entering C2 on your machine 
> looks pretty substantial (Your C2 almost looks like a new machine's C3 
> state, which is supposedly the first level where substantial power 
> savings occur on a new machines).
> 
I did some tests:
1. disconnected CPU fan power
2. booted 2.6.12 (compiled with HZ=100) with init=/bin/sh
3. left it idling on the shell prompt and checked CPU heatsink 
temperature (by hand) - only warm
4. rebooted the same kernel with acpi=off init=/bin/sh
5. left it idling on the shell prompt and checked CPU heatsink 
temperature - warm and slowly getting hot
6. rebooted the same kernel with init=/bin/sh again
7. left it idling on the shell prompt and checked CPU heatsink 
temperature - temperature went back to "warm" :)

Result: ACPI C2 state reduces CPU consumption here

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Hans Kristian Rosbach]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 00:50 -0400, James Bruce wrote:
> Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>  > On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 12:18:18PM -0400, James Bruce wrote:
>  >>The tradeoff is a realistic 4.4% power savings vs a 300% increase in
>  >>the minimum sleep period.  A user will see zero power savings if they
>  >>have a USB mouse (probably 99% of desktops).  On top of that, we can
>                                      ^^^^^^^^
> 
>  > Most laptops (including mine, a Thinkpad T40) use a PS/2 mouse.  So in
>  > the places where power consumption savins matters most, it's usually
>  > quite possible to function without needing any USB devices.  The 90%
>  > figure isn't at all right; in fact, it may be that over 90% of the
>  > laptops still use PS/2 mice and keyboards.
> 
> Yes, laptops are mostly PS/2, which is why I only claimed a statistic 
> for desktops.  Desktops pretty much all use USB mice now.  If 250Hz were 
> only being sold as an option for laptops, we could leave it at that, yet 
> its being pushed as a default that's "good for everyone".  For desktops 
> this is not currently true at all.  By the time USB is fixed to do power 
> saving, we'll probably have a working tick-skipping patch which makes 
> the whole HZ argument moot.

Most new laptops are moving away from PS/2 ports, for example my
shining (literally) new Acer Ferrari 4005 only has USB2 ports for mice
and keyboard inputs (unless in the optional pcie docking station maybe).
So my suggestion would be to fix USB power management.

The mouse that comes with the ferrari 4005 is actually a bluetooth
mouse, but for some reason it is the worst thing I've ever used.

So, what I'm currently using is a usb -> ps/2 converter. I can't imagine
this to be any good for power consumption at all.

(OT:Bad mouse)
-It will overcharge battery so the whole mouse becomes HOT
-Occasionally it will stop working for ~5sec
-The optical sensor takes a while to focus on the pad when lifted and
 put down again.

BTW: The laptop itself is _really_ good, just the mouse is a total
     failure.

-HK

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Dmitry Torokhov]

On 8/3/05, Hans Kristian Rosbach <hans.kristian@isphuset.no> wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 00:50 -0400, James Bruce wrote:
> > Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> >  > On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 12:18:18PM -0400, James Bruce wrote:
> >  >>The tradeoff is a realistic 4.4% power savings vs a 300% increase in
> >  >>the minimum sleep period.  A user will see zero power savings if they
> >  >>have a USB mouse (probably 99% of desktops).  On top of that, we can
> >                                      ^^^^^^^^
> >
> >  > Most laptops (including mine, a Thinkpad T40) use a PS/2 mouse.  So in
> >  > the places where power consumption savins matters most, it's usually
> >  > quite possible to function without needing any USB devices.  The 90%
> >  > figure isn't at all right; in fact, it may be that over 90% of the
> >  > laptops still use PS/2 mice and keyboards.
> >
> > Yes, laptops are mostly PS/2, which is why I only claimed a statistic
> > for desktops.  Desktops pretty much all use USB mice now.  If 250Hz were
> > only being sold as an option for laptops, we could leave it at that, yet
> > its being pushed as a default that's "good for everyone".  For desktops
> > this is not currently true at all.  By the time USB is fixed to do power
> > saving, we'll probably have a working tick-skipping patch which makes
> > the whole HZ argument moot.
> 
> Most new laptops are moving away from PS/2 ports, for example my
> shining (literally) new Acer Ferrari 4005 only has USB2 ports for mice
> and keyboard inputs (unless in the optional pcie docking station maybe).
> So my suggestion would be to fix USB power management.
>

You are talking about external ports. I am pretty sure that installed
keyboard and touchpad (or whattever pointing device it has) are plain
old PS/2.

-- 
Dmitry

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Hans Kristian Rosbach]

On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 08:57 -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On 8/3/05, Hans Kristian Rosbach <hans.kristian@isphuset.no> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 00:50 -0400, James Bruce wrote:
> > > Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > >  > On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 12:18:18PM -0400, James Bruce wrote:
> > >  >>The tradeoff is a realistic 4.4% power savings vs a 300% increase in
> > >  >>the minimum sleep period.  A user will see zero power savings if they
> > >  >>have a USB mouse (probably 99% of desktops).  On top of that, we can
> > >                                      ^^^^^^^^
> > >
> > >  > Most laptops (including mine, a Thinkpad T40) use a PS/2 mouse.  So in
> > >  > the places where power consumption savins matters most, it's usually
> > >  > quite possible to function without needing any USB devices.  The 90%
> > >  > figure isn't at all right; in fact, it may be that over 90% of the
> > >  > laptops still use PS/2 mice and keyboards.
> > >
> > > Yes, laptops are mostly PS/2, which is why I only claimed a statistic
> > > for desktops.  Desktops pretty much all use USB mice now.  If 250Hz were
> > > only being sold as an option for laptops, we could leave it at that, yet
> > > its being pushed as a default that's "good for everyone".  For desktops
> > > this is not currently true at all.  By the time USB is fixed to do power
> > > saving, we'll probably have a working tick-skipping patch which makes
> > > the whole HZ argument moot.
> > 
> > Most new laptops are moving away from PS/2 ports, for example my
> > shining (literally) new Acer Ferrari 4005 only has USB2 ports for mice
> > and keyboard inputs (unless in the optional pcie docking station maybe).
> > So my suggestion would be to fix USB power management.
> >
> 
> You are talking about external ports. I am pretty sure that installed
> keyboard and touchpad (or whattever pointing device it has) are plain
> old PS/2.

Well, yes..

But as I _never_ use the touchpad, it is quite necessary to keep USB
enabled for me at any time as an external PS2 mouse is not possible.

-HK

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Tony Lindgren]

* James Bruce <bruce@andrew.cmu.edu> [050801 09:28]:
> 
> Finally, as a conspiracy theorist, I wonder if Linus is just playing us 
> to get more people working on the tick skipping and highres timer 
> patches.  Someone with the ability to herd cats obviously has to be 
> sneaky.  As an impressive demonstration of my free will I'm going to go 
> test dyntick on my VIA Epia board...

Yeah, I've been running dyntick on my VIA Epia home server for a while now:

# uname -r
2.6.12-rc4

# uptime
 23:39:46 up 76 days,  9:10,  5 users,  load average: 0.00, 0.01, 0.00

# pmstats 5
Current: 0mA Voltage: 0.00mV Power: 0.00W 0mAh Time: 00:00h Ticks: 0HZ
Current: 0mA Voltage: 0.00mV Power: 0.00W 0mAh Time: 00:00h Ticks: 33HZ
Current: 0mA Voltage: 0.00mV Power: 0.00W 0mAh Time: 00:00h Ticks: 32HZ
Current: 0mA Voltage: 0.00mV Power: 0.00W 0mAh Time: 00:00h Ticks: 34HZ
Current: 0mA Voltage: 0.00mV Power: 0.00W 0mAh Time: 00:00h Ticks: 35HZ

My server is mostly idle, and the average HZ is around 35HZ.

This is still with the max HZ set to 1000. With dyntick, the max HZ
should be set to something that provides best performance under heavy
load on the system. Or least latency or whatever.

But AFAIK, it does not make any sense to limit the max HZ because of
power savings. That's just a bad compromise.

Regards,

Tony

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> >Any argument along the lines of the change of a default
> >value in the defconfig screwing people over equally applies the other
> >way around; by not changing the defconfig, you're screwing laptop users
> >(and others that want less power consumption) over.  The world is not
> >black and white, it's a very boring gray (or a very sadening bloody
> >red; but I hope we won't come to that point just because of a silly
> >argument on lkml...)
> 
> The tradeoff is a realistic 4.4% power savings vs a 300% increase in the 
> minimum sleep period.  A user will see zero power savings if they have a 
> USB mouse (probably 99% of desktops).  On top of that, we can throw in 
> Con's disturbing AV benchmark results (1).  As a result, some of us 
> don't think 250HZ is a great tradeoff to make
> _for_the_default_value_.

As I said, I do not care about default value. And you should not care,
too, since distros are likely to pick their own defaults.

> From what I can tell, tick skipping works fine right now, it just needs 
> some cleanup.  Thus I'd expect something like it will get integrated 
> into 2.6.14.  If it gets in, the default HZ should go back up to 1000. 
> In that case why decrease it for exactly one patchlevel?

I am afraid that CONFIG_NO_IDLE_HZ will be ready for 2.6.14...

								Pavel
-- 
teflon -- maybe it is a trademark, but it should not be.

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 13:23 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> As I said, I do not care about default value. And you should not care,
> too, since distros are likely to pick their own defaults.

If the default value does not matter then the default should remain at
1000 so as to not violate the principle of least surprise for people who
run "make oldconfig".  Why is this so hard for people to understand?

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Roman Zippel]

Hi,

On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, Lee Revell wrote:

> On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 13:23 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > As I said, I do not care about default value. And you should not care,
> > too, since distros are likely to pick their own defaults.
> 
> If the default value does not matter then the default should remain at
> 1000 so as to not violate the principle of least surprise for people who
> run "make oldconfig".  Why is this so hard for people to understand?

Because people who run "make oldconfig" are expected to have some clue 
about how to read help texts. Please get some, thanks.

bye, Roman

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> >In the end, Linus will decide this anyway.  I can understand that you
> >don't want to change your application.  Help developing the dynamic
> >tick patch, and maybe you won't have to =)
> 
> From what I can tell, tick skipping works fine right now, it just needs 
> some cleanup.  Thus I'd expect something like it will get integrated 
> into 2.6.14.  If it gets in, the default HZ should go back up to 1000. 
> In that case why decrease it for exactly one patchlevel?
> 
> As an app programmer, it'd be nice not to have to support 2.6.13 
> differently from 2.6.(x!=13).  For my app, busy waiting means a ~12% 
> load increase for 2.6.13 compared to (probably) all other 2.6 kernel 
> versions.  That's certainly violating the principle of least surprise. 
> Up to now, it was easy enough to tell people "upgrade from 2.4.x and 
> it'll work better".  Now it gets more complicated.

BTW I think many architectures have HZ=100 even in 2.6, so it is not
as siple as "go 2.6"...
								Pavel

-- 
teflon -- maybe it is a trademark, but it should not be.

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 13:25 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> BTW I think many architectures have HZ=100 even in 2.6, so it is not
> as siple as "go 2.6"...

Does not matter.  An app that only ever worked on 2.6 + x86 will break
on 2.6.13.

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Stephen Ray]

Lee Revell wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 13:25 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> 
>>BTW I think many architectures have HZ=100 even in 2.6, so it is not
>>as siple as "go 2.6"...
> 
> 
> Does not matter.  An app that only ever worked on 2.6 + x86 will break
> on 2.6.13.
> 
> Lee
> 

But then isn't that app broken?  What if the user running it selects 
something other than HZ=1000?

Stephen

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 14:13 -0300, Stephen Ray wrote:
> Lee Revell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 13:25 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > 
> >>BTW I think many architectures have HZ=100 even in 2.6, so it is not
> >>as siple as "go 2.6"...
> > 
> > 
> > Does not matter.  An app that only ever worked on 2.6 + x86 will break
> > on 2.6.13.
> > 
> > Lee
> > 
> 
> But then isn't that app broken?  What if the user running it selects 
> something other than HZ=1000?

Then they changed the setting from the defaults, so they get what they
deserve.  If kernel defaults are irrelevant, the only issue is whether
or not we choose to violate the principle of least surprise for people
who run kernel.org kernels.  The technical merits of different HZ
settings are completely irrelevant.

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Lee Revell]

On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 21:51 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > I think this is a good argument for leaving HZ at 1000 until some of
> > these userspace bugs are fixed.
> 
> WTF? HZ=1000 eats energy like crazy. artsd eats energy like crazy. And
> you advocate breaking kernel because artsd is broken?!

Also as Con's numbers demonstrate, from the interactivity POV it is you
who are breaking the kernel.

Lee

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> I was finally able to get C3 state working. It seems that my BIOS is
> leaving USB controllers in an active state(?). Without any USB drivers
> loaded, C3 is not possible. With drivers loaded, but no device plugged
> in C3 works fine. Kernel is 2.6.13-rc3-mm3 + acpi-sbs.
> 
> With working C3 there are indeed differences:
> 
> Voltage is 16.5 V
> 
> HZ=100:  ~460 mA => 7.59 W
> HZ=250:  ~468 mA => 7.72 W
> HZ=1000: ~494 mA => 8.15 W

0.55W difference, wow. And that's 7% difference to overall system
consumption.
								Pavel
-- 
teflon -- maybe it is a trademark, but it should not be.

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Bill Davidsen]

Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> 
>>I was finally able to get C3 state working. It seems that my BIOS is
>>leaving USB controllers in an active state(?). Without any USB drivers
>>loaded, C3 is not possible. With drivers loaded, but no device plugged
>>in C3 works fine. Kernel is 2.6.13-rc3-mm3 + acpi-sbs.
>>
>>With working C3 there are indeed differences:
>>
>>Voltage is 16.5 V
>>
>>HZ=100:  ~460 mA => 7.59 W
>>HZ=250:  ~468 mA => 7.72 W
>>HZ=1000: ~494 mA => 8.15 W
> 
> 
> 0.55W difference, wow. And that's 7% difference to overall system
> consumption.

But it's totally meaning less isn't it? Disable the USB, there goes the 
kb/mouse, turn off the LCD you can't see anything, spin down the disk, 
you can't do i/o, and run the CPU in idle so you can't DO anything.

At that point you might as well turn it off and save 100%.

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[ambx1]

----- Original Message -----
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Date: Monday, August 1, 2005 4:42 pm
Subject: Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

> On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 12:18:18PM -0400, James Bruce wrote:
> > 
> > The tradeoff is a realistic 4.4% power savings vs a 300% increase 
> in the 
> > minimum sleep period.  A user will see zero power savings if they 
> have a 
> > USB mouse (probably 99% of desktops).  On top of that, we can 
> throw in 
> > Con's disturbing AV benchmark results (1).  As a result, some of 
> us 
> > don't think 250HZ is a great tradeoff to make 
> _for_the_default_value_.
> Most laptops (including mine, a Thinkpad T40) use a PS/2 mouse.  So in
> the places where power consumption savins matters most, it's usually
> quite possible to function without needing any USB devices.  The 90%
> figure isn't at all right; in fact, it may be that over 90% of the
> laptops still use PS/2 mice and keyboards.
> 
>                                        	- Ted

Also, my understanding was that when we properly support usb suspend,
this won't be an issue anyway for much usb hardware.  I think it's
possible to put some mice to sleep when there isn't any motion and
then wakeup later.

4.4% savings may not be much, but these things do add up.  For a
laptop's workload, I think this is worth it.

Thanks,
Adam

Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[James Bruce]

(Sorry all, but after receiving about 5 similar messages I'm going to 
make one last reply.)

ambx1@neo.rr.com wrote:
> Also, my understanding was that when we properly support usb suspend,
> this won't be an issue anyway for much usb hardware.  I think it's
> possible to put some mice to sleep when there isn't any motion and
> then wakeup later.

By the time we properly support USB suspend, it won't matter because the 
dynamic tick patch will likely have been integrated.  An argument for 
why we should change a value in the future is pointless when the 
question is what the value should be right now.

> 4.4% savings may not be much, but these things do add up.

A 300% increase in minimum sleep latency adds up quite quickly.

The point that people joining this thread keep missing is that we're 
making a change that:
   (a) offers a small benefit to laptop users
   (b) messes up other uses such as video
   (c) is likely to be completely obsolete by 2.6.14

> For a laptop's workload, I think this is worth it.

Good, so on your laptop go choose 100Hz.  You already have to configure 
your kernel to change values from their defaults anyway, otherwise you 
won't see any of that 4.4% savings.  However, please don't screw up 
video and interactivity (1) for everyone who uses default values on 
their desktops in order to get your savings.

(1) http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/319124/

Rather like the famous gcc 2.96, this is something that will confuse 
users for some time to come.  Just about every video app will need an 
FAQ entry to say why 2.6.13 doesn't work as well and drops frames while 
2.6.(x!=13) works just fine.  Unless of course distros read this thread 
and decide not to pick up this change; That I guess is the only reason 
I'm still posting.

Now as Lee said, please let this thread die.  We need to go work on 
dyntick and test it on as much hardware as possible and try to uncover 
any lurking bugs.  If you care about saving power or multimedia, you 
should test it too (think ~10% savings rather than 4.4%).

  - Jim Bruce