Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752967Ab3DOGRg (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Apr 2013 02:17:36 -0400 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:43332 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751067Ab3DOGRf (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Apr 2013 02:17:35 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,473,1363158000"; d="scan'208";a="322350790" Message-ID: <516B9B57.3030902@intel.com> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 14:16:55 +0800 From: Alex Shi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130329 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Borislav Petkov CC: Len Brown , mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org, arjan@linux.intel.com, pjt@google.com, namhyung@kernel.org, efault@gmx.de, morten.rasmussen@arm.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, len.brown@intel.com, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, jkosina@suse.cz, clark.williams@gmail.com, tony.luck@intel.com, keescook@chromium.org, mgorman@suse.de, riel@redhat.com, Linux PM list Subject: Re: [patch v7 0/21] sched: power aware scheduling References: <1365040862-8390-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@intel.com> <516724F5.20504@kernel.org> <5167C9FA.8050406@intel.com> <20130412162348.GE2368@pd.tnic> <516A0652.8040505@intel.com> <20130414155925.GC20547@pd.tnic> <516B9859.70004@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <516B9859.70004@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1358 Lines: 29 On 04/15/2013 02:04 PM, Alex Shi wrote: > On 04/14/2013 11:59 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: >> > On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 09:28:50AM +0800, Alex Shi wrote: >>> >> Even some scenario the total energy cost more, at least the avg watts >>> >> dropped in that scenarios. >> > >> > Ok, what's wrong with x = 32 then? So basically if you're looking at >> > avg watts, you don't want to have more than 16 threads, otherwise >> > powersaving sucks on that particular uarch and platform. Can you say >> > that for all platforms out there? > The cpu freq boost make the avg watts higher with x = 32, and also make > higher power efficiency. We can disable cpu freq boost for this if we > want lower power consumption all time. > But for my understanding, the power efficient is better way to save power. BTW, lowest p-state, no freq boost and plus this powersaving policy will give the lowest power consumption. And I need to say again. the powersaving policy just effect on system under utilisation. when system goes busy, it won't has effect. performance oriented policy will take over balance behaviour. -- Thanks Alex -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/