Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management
From: Arjan van de Ven
Date: Wed Sep 25 2013 - 21:15:34 EST
On 9/25/2013 4:47 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
Also, the changelogs don't appear to discuss one obvious downside: the
latency incurred in bringing a bank out of one of the low-power states
and back into full operation. Please do discuss and quantify that to
the best of your knowledge.
On Sandy Bridge the memry wakeup overhead is really small. It's on by default
in most setups today.
btw note that those kind of memory power savings are content-preserving,
so likely a whole chunk of these patches is not actually needed on SNB
(or anything else Intel sells or sold)
--
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/