[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1214553090.2801.7.camel@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 09:51:30 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: dipankar@...ibm.com, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Suresh B Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Vatsa <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1] Tunable sched_mc_power_savings=n
On Fri, 2008-06-27 at 00:38 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> >> And your workload manager could just nice processes. It should probably
> >> do that anyways to tell ondemand you don't need full frequency.
> >
> > Except that I want my nice 19 distcc processes to utilize as much cpu as
> > possible, but just not bother any other stuff I might be doing...
>
> They already won't do that if you run ondemand and cpufreq. It won't
> crank up the frequency for niced processes.
>
> Extending that existing policy to socket load balancing would be only
> natural.
There used to be an option for them to also up on niced load. If that
disappeared then I'd call that a huge usability regression. Basically
making ondemand useless.
/me checks,..
Yeah, on F9, my opteron runs at 1GHz when idle, but when I start distcc,
which like said runs on nice 19, the cpu speed goes up to 2.4GHz.
And it uses the ondemand govenor.
--
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