[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100419174737.GA13331@srcf.ucam.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:47:37 +0100
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To: Luming Yu <luming.yu@...il.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
"Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
"Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] use acpi_idle_enter_simple if bm_check &&
!.bm_control
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 02:12:41PM +0800, Luming Yu wrote:
> I came across acpi processor idle driver, noticed that we can cut a
> bit overhead at C3 entry that can improve C3 residency a bit,
> especially when it has similar kernel config as old RHEL 5 kernel
> (2.6.18) on systems with as many as 64 logical CPUs. The point of this
> patch is bm_sts is an optional bit. It never returns 1 on systems with
> bm_check && !bm_control I tested. Instead, I have observed lower C3
> residency due to accessing bm_sts and relevant code on a system with
> 64 logical CPUs with HZ=1000. Please review. If make sense, please
> apply.
Saves 40W or so on a dual-socket Nehalem system here. Is there a reason
it wasn't picked up?
--
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