| 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: <20090912113939.GA7119@srcf.ucam.org> Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 12:39:39 +0100 From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org> To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lenb@...nel.org, mingo@...e.hu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, peterz@...radead.org, yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, jens.axboe@...cle.com Subject: Re: PATCH] cpuidle: A new variant of the menu governor to boost IO performance On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 05:26:47AM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 23:03:09 +0100 > Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org> wrote: > > > When you say that a bit more power was used, is that instantaneous > > power draw or total power consumption over the run of the benchmark? > > I'd have expected that completing it 50% faster and then going idle > > would be a win overall. > > I meant power, not total energy :-) > > in terms of energy it's a win if you only do a fixed amount of work... Ok, so not really a downside. Not entirely relatedly, we've also seen io throughput issues related to P-states - using ondemand, we get reduced throughput until the number of clients becomes high enough to push the system into a higher P state. Is this something you've been able to measure? -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org -- 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