Re: 2.6.13-rc3 Battery times at 100/250/1000 Hz = Zero difference

[Jesper Juhl]

On 7/21/05, Voluspa <lista1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> I'd gladly (ehum..) redo this mind-numbingly boring test if someone can
> point me to a magic software which unleashes some untapped powersaving
> feature of the CPU.
> 
> _Kernel 2.6.13-rc3 Boot to Death_:
> 
> 2h48m at 100 HZ
> 2h48m at 250 HZ
> 2h47m at 1000 HZ
> 
> _"Load"_:
> 
> #!/bin/sh
> touch time-hz-start
> while (true) do
>     touch time-hz-end
>     sleep 1m
> done
> 
Ok, so with an idle machine, different HZ makes no noticeable
difference, but I'd suspect things would be different if the machine
was actually doing some work.
Would be more interresting to see how long it lasts with a light load
and with a heavy load.

-- 
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@xxxxxxxxx>
Don't top-post  http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please      http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/