Re: [PATCH v7 0/8] Tunable sched_mc_power_savings=n

[Balbir Singh]

* MinChan Kim <minchan.kim@xxxxxxxxx> [2008-12-30 08:43:58]:

> Hi, Vaidyanathan.
> It's very late reponse. :(
> 
> > Results:
> > --------
> >
> > Basic functionality of the code has not changed and the power vs
> > performance benefits for kernbench are similar to the ones posted
> > earlier.
> >
> > KERNBENCH Runs: make -j4 on a x86 8 core, dual socket quad core cpu
> > package system
> >
> > SchedMC Run Time     Package Idle    Energy  Power
> > 0       81.68        52.83% 54.71%  1.00x J 1.00y W
> > 1       80.70        36.62% 70.11%  0.95x J 0.96y W
> > 2       74.95        19.53% 85.92%  0.90x J 0.98y W
> >
> > The results are marginally better than the previous version of the
> > patch series which could be within the test variation.
> >
> > Please feel free to test, and let me know your comments and feedback.
> > I will post more experimental results with various benchmarks.
> 
> Your result is very interesting.
> level 2 is more fast and efficient of power.
> 
> What's major contributor to use less time in level 2?
> I think it's cache bounce is less time than old.
> Is right ?
>

Yes, correct
 
> I want to test SCHED_MC but I don't know what you use to benchmark about power.
> How do I get the data about 'Package, Idle, Energy, Power'?
> 

Note, it is Package Idle (for both packages), it is a x86-64 8 core,
dual socket, quad core box. It is not Package, Idle.

For Energy and Power you need a means of measuring power like a meter.

> -- 
> Kinds regards,
> MinChan Kim
> 

-- 
	Balbir
--
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/