From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
mingo@elte.hu, peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
davej@redhat.com, cpufreq@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] ondemand: Solve the big performance issue with ondemand during disk IO
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2010 06:56:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100424045626.GA7561@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100423065248.3b0a98ab@infradead.org>
Hi!
> > Well, and now, if you do something like cat /dev/<your usb1.1 hdd> >
> > /dev/null, you'll keep cpu on max frequency. Not a problem for new
> > core i7, but probably big deal for athlon 64.
>
> do you have facts not speculation for this? Does the athlon 64 really
> keep its voltage high during idle? That would surprise me greatly...
So... some old data. It is not exactly athlon 64 -- I don't have that
particular number for it -- but: (from my old notes):
evo n620c [63.3 Wh]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
idle machine at 1.7GHz, min bl: 13.0 W
idle machine at 600MHz, min bl: 12.0 W
thinkpad x32 [52Wh]
~~~~~~~~~~~~
idle machine at 600MHz, min bl: 10 W
at 1.8GHz: +6.6 W
hp nx5k [56.8Wh]
~~~~~~~
idle, min bl: 19 W
min bl, 1.4GHz: 22 W
...so yes, I kind of see a pattern there. And you should be able to
easily see the difference, too, if you took something from that era...
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-24 4:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-18 18:59 [PATCH 0/7] Fix performance issue with ondemand governor Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-18 19:00 ` [PATCH 1/7] sched: add a comment to get_cpu_idle_time_us() Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-26 19:25 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-18 19:01 ` [PATCH 2/7] sched: introduce a function to update the idle statistics Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-26 20:11 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-18 19:01 ` [PATCH 3/7] sched: update the idle statistics in get_cpu_idle_time_us() Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-26 20:36 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-18 19:02 ` [PATCH 4/7] sched: fold updating of the last update time into update_ts_time_stats() Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-26 20:58 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-18 19:02 ` [PATCH 5/7] sched: eliminate the ts->idle_lastupdate field Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-26 21:00 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-18 19:03 ` [PATCH 6/7] sched: introduce get_cpu_iowait_time_us() Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-26 21:05 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-18 19:03 ` [PATCH 7/7] ondemand: Solve the big performance issue with ondemand during disk IO Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-19 8:29 ` Éric Piel
2010-04-19 13:43 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-19 14:30 ` Éric Piel
2010-04-19 14:47 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-20 9:24 ` Thomas Renninger
2010-04-27 0:29 ` Mike Chan
2010-04-27 13:01 ` Pavel Machek
2010-04-27 18:10 ` Mike Chan
2010-04-19 9:09 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2010-04-19 13:46 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-19 15:29 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2010-04-20 0:47 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-20 9:10 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2010-04-20 11:02 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-28 8:57 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2010-04-23 5:26 ` Pavel Machek
2010-04-20 9:29 ` Thomas Renninger
2010-04-20 11:07 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-23 5:24 ` Pavel Machek
2010-04-23 5:38 ` Willy Tarreau
2010-04-23 8:50 ` Thomas Renninger
2010-04-23 16:08 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-27 11:39 ` Thomas Renninger
2010-05-04 3:48 ` [PATCH 8/7] cpufreq: make the iowait-is-busy-time a sysfs tunable Arjan van de Ven
2010-05-04 4:16 ` Willy Tarreau
2010-05-04 5:43 ` Pavel Machek
2010-05-04 13:51 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-23 14:10 ` [PATCH 7/7] ondemand: Solve the big performance issue with ondemand during disk IO Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-23 15:35 ` Willy Tarreau
2010-04-23 13:52 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-23 8:38 ` Pavel Machek
2010-04-23 16:06 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-24 4:56 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2010-05-01 23:29 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-04-26 21:30 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-26 21:41 ` [PATCH 0/7] Fix performance issue with ondemand governor Dave Jones
2010-04-26 21:45 ` Dominik Brodowski
2010-04-26 21:59 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-26 22:05 ` Dominik Brodowski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100424045626.GA7561@elf.ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=cpufreq@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome