Re: [RFC 0/1] Weighted approach to gather and use history in TEO governor

[Pratik Sampat <psampat@linux.ibm.com>]

Hello Doug,

Thanks for running these numbers for me.

On 27/02/20 9:44 pm, Doug Smythies wrote:
> On 2020.02.24 21:13 Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> Could you also provide power measurements for the duration when the
>> system is completely idle for each of the variants of TEO governor ?
>> Is it the case that the benefits that we are seeing above are only due
>> to Wt. TEO being more conservative than TEO governor by always
>> choosing a shallower state ?

For system idle I see similar power statistics for both the TEO and the wtteo.

> For what it's worth:
>
> CPU: Intel: i7-2600K
> Kernel: 5.6-rc2 (teo) and + this patch set (wtteo)
> Note: in general, "idle" on this system is considerably more "idle" than most systems.
> Sample period: 5 minutes.
> CPU scaling driver: intel_cpufreq
> Governor: performance
> Deepest idle state: 4 (C6)
>
> teo:
> Test duration 740 minutes (12.33 hours).
> Average processor package power: 3.84 watts
> Idle state 0:    4.19 / minute
> Idle state 1:   29.26 / minute
> Idle state 2:   46.71 / minute
> Idle state 3:    7.42 / minute
> Idle state 4: 1124.55 / minute
> Total: 2.525 idle entries per cpu per second
>
> wtteo:
> Test duration 1095 minutes (18.25 hours).
> Average processor package power: 3.84 watts
> Idle state 0:    7.98 / minute
> Idle state 1:   30.49 / minute
> Idle state 2:   52.51 / minute
> Idle state 3:    8.65 / minute
> Idle state 4: 1125.33 / minute
> Total: 2.552 idle entries per cpu per second
>
> The above/below data for this test is incomplete because my program
> doesn't process it if there are not enough state entries per sample period.
> (I need to fix that for this type of test.)
>
> I have done a couple of other tests with this patch set,
> but nothing to report yet, as the differences have been minor so far.
>
> ... Doug
>
>
---

Pratik