[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140708002343.GC25653@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 08:23:43 +0800
From: Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com>
To: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
"rjw@...ysocki.net" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"vincent.guittot@...aro.org" <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
"daniel.lezcano@...aro.org" <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
"preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <Dietmar.Eggemann@....com>,
"pjt@...gle.com" <pjt@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 00/23] sched: Energy cost model for energy-aware
scheduling
Hi Morten,
On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 03:16:27PM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> Could you elaborate on what you mean by 'a general statement'?
The general statement is: higher freq, more cap, and more power. More specific
numbers are not needed, as they are just instances of this general statement.
> cpu_power doesn't tell you anything about energy-efficiency. There is no
> link with frequency scaling.
In general, more cpu_power, more freq, less energy-efficiency, as you said sometime ago.
> No representation of power domains.
Represented by CPU topology?
Thanks,
Yuyang
--
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