Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754343AbZJYWqB (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:46:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754331AbZJYWqA (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:46:00 -0400 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.158]:32780 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754327AbZJYWqA (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:46:00 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=bTclYjSec78lgR+fOtk2qlrtJ/aaHINTi3F+lbFyoSKMr0m5ssvZdTSFaY50t2OG0a yZH43ZJQ2E+Xqp8wxE3B0ja4RWuF176NSs9kZAtxoY1UUI0KYiJisN6vXo5ffL0PrkMS 57N6zoDAauwiHlVnLXLm22bxPe6hNX2wt4Bqs= MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:46:03 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Broken ondemand scheduler in Linux 2.6.30+ on Pentium IVs From: Robert Bradbury To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2061 Lines: 43 Somewhere in the Linux 2.6.30+ patches was a change to "arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/ p4-clockmod.c" which changed (around line 253) such that policy->cpuinfo.transition_latency = 1000000; /* assumed */ became policy->cpuinfo.transition_latency = 10000001; This prevents the ondemand scheduler from being adopted and working correctly (on a system with the Gnome CPU Frequency Monitor). The reports I have received regarding *why* this change was made are cryptic at best. I will state that *before* the change CPU frequency scaling did work, the monitor shows the changes and it is reflected at the wall socket (measured power consumption on a Pentium IV system dropped from ~135W to ~105W when ondemand scheduling dropped the CPU frequency from 2.8 GHz down to 350-700 MHz -- which is works fine for most lightly used but need-to-be-on 24/7 web server systems [1]. This change makes Linux less "green" IMO and I would like to know why it was implemented and/or if it was implemented without bother to integrate it with the utility developers that are trying to develop/manage CPU power use at the user level. In this day and age, one should *not* break power consumption reducing features in the O.S. without significant documentation as to how and why. It is worth noting that changing this single line of code back does restore the power conserving features of the "ondemand" scheduler. Robert 1. For more information see: Gentoo Bug #287463 "Kernel modifications break ondemand frequency scaling from conserving power" @ the gentoo bug database (the URL for which was rejected due to LKML security policies) [2] 2. One would think that the LKML could verify and accept the security of various bugzilla based bug reporting systems since reporting bugs this way on the LKML is very, *very* old school. -- 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/