From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753833Ab2LKQDU (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Dec 2012 11:03:20 -0500 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:34808 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753176Ab2LKQDT (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Dec 2012 11:03:19 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,260,1355126400"; d="scan'208";a="260554281" Message-ID: <50C75935.1040004@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 08:03:01 -0800 From: Arjan van de Ven User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Borislav Petkov , Alex Shi , Alex Shi , rob@landley.net, mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, andre.przywara@amd.com, rjw@sisk.pl, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pjt@google.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, Preeti U Murthy Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/18] sched: simplified fork, enable load average into LB and power awareness scheduling References: <1355127754-8444-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@intel.com> <50C722AC.3080806@intel.com> <20121211154819.GC8873@liondog.tnic> In-Reply-To: <20121211154819.GC8873@liondog.tnic> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/11/2012 7:48 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 08:10:20PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote: >> Another testing of parallel compress with pigz on Linus' git tree. >> results show we get much better performance/power with powersaving and >> balance policy: >> >> testing command: >> #pigz -k -c -p$x -r linux* &> /dev/null >> >> On a NHM EP box >> powersaving balance performance >> x = 4 166.516 /88 68 170.515 /82 71 165.283 /103 58 >> x = 8 173.654 /61 94 177.693 /60 93 172.31 /76 76 > > This looks funny: so "performance" is eating less watts than > "powersaving" and "balance" on NHM. Could it be that the average watts > measurements on NHM are not correct/precise..? On SNB they look as > expected, according to your scheme. well... it's not always beneficial to group or to spread out it depends on cache behavior mostly which is best