Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757892AbYF2SFq (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jun 2008 14:05:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755747AbYF2SFh (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jun 2008 14:05:37 -0400 Received: from brmea-mail-4.Sun.COM ([192.18.98.36]:49879 "EHLO brmea-mail-4.sun.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755096AbYF2SFg (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jun 2008 14:05:36 -0400 Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 14:02:58 -0400 From: David Collier-Brown Subject: Re: [RFC v1] Tunable sched_mc_power_savings=n In-reply-to: <12146282628495-twc@hexane.ssi.swin.edu.au> To: Tim Connors Cc: Andi Kleen , Peter Zijlstra , dipankar@in.ibm.com, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Linux Kernel , Suresh B Siddha , Venkatesh Pallipadi , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Vatsa , Gautham R Shenoy Reply-to: davecb@sun.com Message-id: <4867CE52.8040204@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en References: <20080625191100.GI21892@dirshya.in.ibm.com> <87k5gcqpbm.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <4863AF57.3040005@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4863DB29.1020304@firstfloor.org> <20080626185254.GA12416@dirshya.in.ibm.com> <4863F93C.9040102@firstfloor.org> <20080626210025.GB26167@in.ibm.com> <48640C04.9020600@firstfloor.org> <1214516584.12265.10.camel@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <48641A7D.6080204@firstfloor.org> <12146282628495-twc@hexane.ssi.swin.edu.au> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS sun4u; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20041221 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1850 Lines: 46 Andi Kleen said on Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:38:53 +0200: >>Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>>>And your workload manager could just nice processes. It should probably >>>>do that anyways to tell ondemand you don't need full frequency. >>> >>>Except that I want my nice 19 distcc processes to utilize as much cpu as >>>possible, but just not bother any other stuff I might be doing... >> >>They already won't do that if you run ondemand and cpufreq. It won't >>crank up the frequency for niced processes. Tim Connors then wrote: > Shouldn't there be a powernice, just as there is an ionice and a nice? Hmmn, how about: User Commands nice(1) NAME nice - invoke a command with an altered priority SYNOPSIS /usr/bin/nice [-increment | -n increment] [-s|-i|-e|-p] command [argu- ment...] DESCRIPTION The nice utility invokes command, requesting that it be run with a different priority. If -i is specified, the priority of (disk) I/O is modified. If -e is specified, ethernet (or other networking) priority is changed. If -p is specified, power usage priority is changed and if -s is specified, or none of -1, -e or -p is specified, then system scheduling priority is modified... --dave -- David Collier-Brown | Always do right. This will gratify Sun Microsystems, Toronto | some people and astonish the rest davecb@sun.com | -- Mark Twain (905) 943-1983, cell: (647) 833-9377, (800) 555-9786 x56583 bridge: (877) 385-4099 code: 506 9191# -- 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/