linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86-64 highres/dyntick support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1178550801.3042.4.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Mon, 07 May 2007 17:13:21 +0200
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Mats Johannesson <spamcan@...dband.net>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-64 highres/dyntick support

On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 14:07 +0200, Mats Johannesson wrote:
> This AMD 64 Mobile processor only has a C1 level which isn't used:
> 
> root@...ipner:~# cat /proc/acpi/processor/CPU0/power
> active state:            C1
> max_cstate:              C8
> bus master activity:     00000000
> maximum allowed latency: 2000 usec
> states:
>    *C1:                  type[C1] promotion[--] demotion[--]
> latency[000] usage[00000000] duration[00000000000000000000]
> 
> But shouldn't the the kernel 'hlt' routine, or whatever it's called,
> work in conjunction with dyntick to achieve... something...?

To make real power savings from dynticks you need deeper power states in
the CPU. Dyntick can give the idle state code an idea how long the sleep
is going to be, so this code can decide to go into deeper power states
in one go rather than stepping down over time. On a CPU which has no
deeper C states the power saving of dynticks is probably not even
measurable,

	tglx


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/