linux-kernel - Re: Power Saving

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]

Date:	Tue, 27 Nov 2007 17:31:37 -0500
From:	Phillip Susi <psusi@....rr.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Stephen Clark <Stephen.Clark@...lark.us>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Power Saving

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> And more importantly, there is no power advantages over T states as 
> opposed to C states.  They pretty much mean pulsing the system in and 
> out of either C1 or C2 depending on the CPU/chipset.

Well, they FORCE the use of the C states to save power, even if the 
kernel doesn't want to because it still has runnable tasks.  This can be 
useful if you know you are running a task that busy waits but would not 
suffer from having the performance of the cpu cut in half.  Since it is 
busy waiting, the kernel never activates the C states, but the 
throttling will force it and thus, save you power and heat.

-
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/