Re: [discussion]sched: a rough proposal to enable power saving inscheduler

From: Matthew Garrett
Date: Wed Aug 22 2012 - 09:21:49 EST


On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 06:02:48AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 8/21/2012 10:41 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > For my dinky dual core laptop, I suspect you're right, but for a more
> > powerful laptop, I'd expect spread/don't to be noticeable.
>
> yeah if you don't spread, you will waste some power.
> but.. current linux behavior is to spread.
> so we can only make it worse.

Right. For a single socket system the only thing you can do is use two
threads in preference to using two cores. That'll keep an extra core in
a deep C state for longer, at the cost of keeping the package out of a
deep C state for longer. There might be a win if the two processes
benefit from improved L1 cache locality, or if you're talking about
short periodic work, but for the majority of cases I'd expect Arjan to
be completely correct here. Things get more interesting with
multi-socket systems, but that's beyond the laptop use case.

--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
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/