[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120817195033.GA15589@srcf.ucam.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 20:50:34 +0100
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To: Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@...band.com>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
preeti <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>,
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [discussion]sched: a rough proposal to enable power saving in
scheduler
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 01:45:09PM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
> On 08/17/2012 12:47 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> The datasheet for the Xeon E5 (my variant at least) says it doesn't
> do C7 so never powers down the LLC. However, as you said earlier
> once you can put the socket into C6 which saves about 30W compared
> to C1E.
>
> So as far as I can see with this CPU at least you would benefit from
> shutting down a whole socket when possible.
Having any active cores on the system prevents all packages from going
into PC6 or deeper. What I'm not clear on is whether less deep package C
states are also blocked.
--
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