mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@gmail.com>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cpufreq@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: ondemand: Introduces stepped frequency increase
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 16:37:32 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4e5e476b0907140737g74220bb1n42ceba5d8c8aa92a@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090708174741.GA23487@srcf.ucam.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2539 bytes --]

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Matthew Garrett<mjg@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 07:41:23PM +0200, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
>> Hi Matthew,
>> > Is this a measured powersaving? The ondemand model is based on the
>> > assumption that the idle state is disproportionately lower in power than
>> > any running state, and therefore it's more sensible to run flat out for
>> > short periods of time than run at half speed for longer. Is this
>> > inherently flawed, or is it an artifact of differences in your processor
>> > design?
>>
>> The flawed assumption is that running at doubled frequency halves the
>> completion time.
>> On cpus that can change the core speed without impacting the
>> memory-cache bandwidth
>> (i.e. the Pentium M), workloads that access lot of memory go at the
>> same speed at
>> maximum and minimum frequency.
>> Now I see new CPUs that can flush their cache during deep idle states (Atoms),
>> this aggravates the aforementioned problem, rendering the high
>> frequency state much less appetible.
>
> Do you have numbers to support this? What effect does the ramping up
> have on user-visible latency?
I have the numbers now (see attached).
On my Pentium M machine, I run twice the following test, one with
freq_step = 100, and one with 5, sampling the remaining capacity every
20 minutes, for 12 samples.
* booted from battery after full discharge and full recharge.
* started firefox (with empty page)
* run the script:
for cpu in /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu[0]/; do
    # reset to defaults for my system
    cat $cpu/cpufreq/phc_default_vids > $cpu/cpufreq/phc_vids
    echo ondemand > $cpu/cpufreq/scaling_governor
    echo 0 > $cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/ignore_nice_load
    echo 20000 > $cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/sampling_rate
done

for cpu in /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu[0]/; do
    echo $1 > $cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/freq_step;
done

killall xscreensaver
sync
xrandr --output LVDS --off
for i in `seq 0 11`; do
    cat /proc/acpi/battery/BAT*/state > test.$1.$i.bat
    sleep 1200
done
xrandr --output LVDS --auto
shutdown -h now

The attached tsv shows that freq_step=5 saves around 1%-2% of power
with respect to freq_step=100 (default cpufreq behaviour).
>
> --
> Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
>



-- 
__________________________________________________________________________

dott. Corrado Zoccolo                          mailto:czoccolo@gmail.com
PhD - Department of Computer Science - University of Pisa, Italy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: result.tsv --]
[-- Type: text/tab-separated-values, Size: 202 bytes --]

"sample"	5	100	"diff"
0	3960	3960	0
1	3800	3800	0
2	3680	3640	40
3	3560	3520	40
4	3400	3360	40
5	3240	3200	40
6	3120	3080	40
7	2960	2920	40
8	2840	2760	80
9	2680	2600	80
10	2520	2440	80
11	2360	2320	40

  reply	other threads:[~2009-07-14 14:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-07-08 13:56 Corrado Zoccolo
2009-07-08 14:18 ` Michael S. Zick
2009-07-08 17:45   ` Corrado Zoccolo
2009-07-08 16:10 ` Matthew Garrett
2009-07-08 16:33   ` Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2009-07-08 18:05     ` Corrado Zoccolo
2009-07-08 17:41   ` Corrado Zoccolo
2009-07-08 17:47     ` Matthew Garrett
2009-07-14 14:37       ` Corrado Zoccolo [this message]
2009-07-09 23:34     ` Pavel Machek
2009-07-14 14:44       ` Corrado Zoccolo
2009-07-14 14:59         ` Matthew Garrett

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=4e5e476b0907140737g74220bb1n42ceba5d8c8aa92a@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=czoccolo@gmail.com \
    --cc=cpufreq@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=davej@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mjg@redhat.com \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®