Re: [PATCH 00/10] mm: Linux VM Infrastructure to support MemoryPower Management

[Matthew Garrett]

On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 09:55:29AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 04:59:54PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > For the server case, the low hanging fruit would seem to be 
> > finer-grained self-refresh. At best we seem to be able to do that on a 
> > per-CPU socket basis right now. The difference between active and 
> > self-refresh would seem to be much larger than the difference between 
> > self-refresh and powered down.
> 
> By "finer-grained self-refresh" you mean turning off refresh for banks
> of memory that are not being used, right?  If so, this is supported by
> the memory-regions support provided, at least assuming that the regions
> can be aligned with the self-refresh boundaries.

I mean at the hardware level. As far as I know, the best we can do at 
the moment is to put an entire node into self refresh when the CPU hits 
package C6.

-- 
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/