Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759734AbYATFio (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Jan 2008 00:38:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752822AbYATFig (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Jan 2008 00:38:36 -0500 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:45139 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752740AbYATFif (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Jan 2008 00:38:35 -0500 Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 06:42:02 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: David Newall Cc: Andi Kleen , Matt Mackall , Chodorenko Michail , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: PROBLEM: Celeron Core Message-ID: <20080120054202.GA19861@one.firstfloor.org> References: <1200702477.25782.41.camel@cinder.waste.org> <20080119011506.GA23798@one.firstfloor.org> <1200715842.25782.95.camel@cinder.waste.org> <20080119042750.GA24481@one.firstfloor.org> <1200717635.25782.107.camel@cinder.waste.org> <20080119045415.GA27628@one.firstfloor.org> <4792CF9A.2030601@davidnewall.com> <20080120051338.GA19784@one.firstfloor.org> <4792DADD.70504@davidnewall.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4792DADD.70504@davidnewall.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1610 Lines: 40 On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 03:53:41PM +1030, David Newall wrote: > Andi Kleen wrote: > >> Isn't it the case that an idle machine will use > >> less power when throttled than when not? > >> > > > > No that is not the case (not even on old CPUs) > > > Then why would it run cooler? Ok for one more (but last) time: Throttling just lowers the short term heat spikes to prevent short term damage to the silicon. For that it focusses on lowering the absolute temperature at a given point. That only applies when the CPU is busy. But for total power consumption (or rather more concretly conserving your battery) you don't care about absolute temperature at a given point (as long as it is not high enough that it destroys the CPU) you care about how much power is consumed (and heat generated from that) averaged out over a longer time. And for most typical workloads (not running endless loops; significant idle time) throttling makes no difference and in fact often (especially on laptop CPUs with deeper sleep modi like the original reported had one) makes it likely worse (see previous mails for details why) > I'm not convinced. I'm along way from that. Frankly that's fine for me. I don't really feel any need to convince you. I can live with your metal model of CPU physics not being accurate. -Andi (feeling a bit like a broken record) > -- 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/