[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1365785311.5814.36.camel@marge.simpson.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:48:31 +0200
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, arjan@...ux.intel.com, pjt@...gle.com,
namhyung@...nel.org, morten.rasmussen@....com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, len.brown@...el.com,
rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com, jkosina@...e.cz,
clark.williams@...il.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
keescook@...omium.org, mgorman@...e.de, riel@...hat.com,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch v7 0/21] sched: power aware scheduling
On Fri, 2013-04-12 at 18:23 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 04:46:50PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> > Thanks a lot for comments, Len!
>
> AFAICT, you kinda forgot to answer his most important question:
>
> > These numbers suggest that this patch series simultaneously
> > has a negative impact on performance and energy required
> > to retire the workload. Why do it?
Hm. When I tested AIM7 compute on a NUMA box, there was a marked
throughput increase at the low to moderate load end of the test spectrum
IIRC. Fully repeatable. There were also other benefits unrelated to
power, ie mitigation of the evil face of select_idle_sibling(). I
rather liked what I saw during ~big box test-drive.
(just saying there are other aspects besides joules in there)
-Mike
--
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