[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080109122847.GA28955@dirshya.in.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 17:58:47 +0530
From: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
discuss@...sWatts.org,
Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
Chanda Sethia <chanda.sethia@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Analysis of sched_mc_power_savings
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> [2008-01-09 12:35:07]:
>
> * Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > How do we take this technique to the next step where we can
> > consolidate short running jobs as well? Did you face any difficulty
> > biasing the CPU for short running jobs?
>
> are you sure your measurement tasks do not impact the measurement
> workload? If you use something like 'top' then try running it reniced to
> +19. (or perhaps even bound to a particular CPU, say #3, to make its
> impact isolated)
Hi Ingo,
I will watch this during the experiments. I have been using klog
application to dump relayfs data. I did run powertop and top as well,
I will bind them to certain CPUs and isolate their impact.
I believe the margin of error would be less since all the measurement
tasks sleep for long duration.
Thanks,
Vaidy
--
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