Re: [PATCH] i386 No-Idle-Hz aka Dynamic-Ticks 3

[Bill Davidsen]

Jim MacBaine wrote:
> I just borrowed a power meter to see (or not to see) real effects of
> dyntick. The difference between static 1000 HZ and dynamic HZ is much
> less than I expected, only a very little about noise.  With dyntick
> disabled at 1000 HZ my laptop needs 31,3 W.  With dyntick enabled I
> get 29.8 W, the pmstats-0.2 script shows me that the system is at
> 35-45 HZ when it is idle.
>
> The power consumption difference between 250 HZ static and dyntick is
> below the noise, so maybe hardly worth all the struggle.

I think it's the other way round, we have the lower power without the 
higher latency. At least as I can measure...

Bravo to all concerned to get this to the testing stage!

--
   -bill davidsen (davidsen@xxxxxxx)
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
 last possible moment - but no longer"  -me
-
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/