Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754627Ab0DSRUV (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:20:21 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.44.51]:60965 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754331Ab0DSRUT convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:20:19 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to: cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-system-of-record; b=oCpSYk0le292q3ka9j/wUNLkDmUo2k1m5qT2rPLyqxA1nbeXulSINyHiVk8FlYA+T 3ykb7pOBfwOpb6HS4gi/g== MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1271317886.32749.69.camel@laptop> References: <20100413234902.29004.41655.stgit@bumblebee1.mtv.corp.google.com> <1271317886.32749.69.camel@laptop> Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 10:20:01 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] [idled]: Idle Cycle Injector for power capping From: Salman Qazi To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, arjan@infradead.org, csadler@google.com, ranjitm@google.com, kenchen@google.com, dawnchen@google.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-System-Of-Record: true Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1416 Lines: 31 On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, 2010-04-13 at 17:08 -0700, Salman wrote: >> As we discussed earlier this year, Google has an implementation that it >> would like to share. ?I have finally gotten around to porting it to >> v2.6.33 and cleaning up the interfaces. ?It is provided in the following >> messages for your review. ?I realize that when we first discussed this >> idea, a lot of ideas were presented for enhancing it. ?Thanks alot for >> your suggestions. ?I haven't gotten around to implementing any of them. > > .33 is way too old to submit patches against. Will bump up the version when I refresh the change. > > That said, I really really dislike this approach, I would much rather > see it tie in with power aware scheduling. I think I can see your point: there is potentially better information about the power consumption of the CPU beyond the time it was busy. But please clarify: is your complaint the lack of use of this information or are you arguing for a deeper integration into the scheduler (I.e. implementing it as part of the scheduler rather than an independent thread) or both? > > -- 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/