[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130430084135.GA21473@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:41:35 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>, 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
* Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 07:16 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > Well now, that's not exactly what I expected to see for AIM7 compute.
> > Filesystem is munching cycles otherwise used for compute when load is
> > spread across the whole box vs consolidated.
>
> So AIM7 compute performance delta boils down to: powersaving stacks
> tasks, so they pat single bit of spinning rust sequentially/gently.
So AIM7 with real block IO improved, due to sequentiality. Does it improve
if AIM7 works on an SSD, or into ramdisk?
Which are the workloads where 'powersaving' mode hurts workload
performance measurably?
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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