[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <3AF99A8F-BF71-43BD-ADB8-4A1FF53F9FFF@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 15:08:56 +0300
From: Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...il.com>
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
mou Chen <hi3766691@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: Plumbers: Tweaking scheduler policy micro-conf RFP
On May 15, 2012, at 11:26 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:
> On Tue, 15 May 2012 14:35:53 +0300, Pantelis Antoniou said:
>
>> Thermal management: How to distribute load to the processors in such
>> a way that the temperature of the die doesn't increase too much that
>> we have to either go to a lower OPP or shut down the core all-together.
>> This is in direct conflict with throughput since we'd have better performance
>> if we could keep the same warmed-up cpu going.
>
> It's not just "temperature of the die". When you have multiple aisles of 42U
> racks full of servers, you often hit "must keep average total BTU load per
> server below X" constraints. There's plenty of colo's that are only using 40%
> of their floor space due to cooling constraints (you may be able to get the
> power company to pull another megawatt of copper into the building, but then
> you need to find someplace to put another megawatt worth of cooling).
>
Interesting,
Never thought about that...
-- Pantelis
--
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