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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20071010204422.GC5097@linux.intel.com> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:44:22 -0700 From: Mark Gross <mgross@...ux.intel.com> To: "Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com> Cc: Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@...lub.uwaterloo.ca>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>, kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: gigabit ethernet power consumption On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 11:41:17AM -0700, Kok, Auke wrote: > Lennart Sorensen wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 03:31:51PM -0700, Kok, Auke wrote: > >> you most certainly want to do this in userspace I think. > >> > >> One of the biggest problems is that link negotiation can take a significant amount > >> of time, well over several seconds (1 to 3 seconds typical) with gigabit, and > >> having your ethernet connection go offline for 3 seconds may not be the desired > >> effect for when you want to get more bandwidth in the first place. > >> > >> However, when a laptop is in battery mode, switching down from gigabit to 100mbit > >> makes a lot more sense, so this is something I would recommend. This can be as > >> easy as changing the advertisement mask of the interface and renegotiating the > >> link. Userspace could handle that very easily. > > > > Now if you were trying to transfer a lot of data to the laptop, would it > > be more power efficient to do it at gigabit speeds so you can finish > > sooner and shut down the machine entirely, or to slow to 100mbit and > > take longer to do it, and hence spend more time powering the cpu and > > ram? > > my suspicion is that the cost of switching is much higher than what you would > consume running at 100mbit, even if the amount of data is quite large. going > offline to renegotiate the link would already cost you 3W typically. > > I definately think that userspace is the right field to solve this problem: let > the users decide how to use the available power on their sytems through a decent > power profile tool (perhaps gnome-power-manager or something like that). This way > the user can choose. > Auke, I was wondering if we could use PM-QOS to have the driver drop to the 100Mb speed, when requests for bandwidth and latency are not in effect? --mgross - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists