Re: power increase issue on light load

From: Alex,Shi
Date: Thu Jun 23 2011 - 20:41:56 EST


On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 17:02 +0800, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 10:43 +0800, Alex,Shi wrote:
> > commit c8b281161dfa4bb5d5be63fb036ce19347b88c63 causes light load
> > benchmark use more than 10% system power on platform NHM-EP and laptop
> > Thinkpad T410 etc. The benchmarks are specpower and bltk office.
> >
> > I tried to track this issue, but only find deep C sate time reduced
> > much, about from 90% to 30~40%, the C0 or C1 state increase much on
> > different machines.
> >
> > Powertop just hints RES interrupts has a bit more. but when I try "perf
> > probe native_smp_send_reschedule". I didn't find much.
> >
> > I also checked the /proc/schedstat, just can sure the load_balance was
> > called a bit more frequency. but pull_task() was called really rare.
> >
> >
> > The following are the /proc/schedstat increased number in about 300' when do bltk-office.
> > The getting command is here:
> > #on a 16 LCPU system, with 3 level domain, 0,1,2, so all domain number
> > is 48, the domain statistic number is 2 + 36, so fs=38,
> >
> > $cat /proc/schedstat > schedstat ; sleep x ; cat /proc/schedstat >>
> > schedstat ; cat schedstat | grep domain | sed '49 i \\n' | awk -v fs=38
> > 'BEGIN { RS=""; FS=" " } { if ( NR ==1) for (i=0; i<NF; i++)
> > { value1[i]=$i ; } ; if ( NR ==2) for (i=0; i<NF; i++) { value2[i]=
> > $i } } END {ORS=" "; for (i=0;i<NF;i++){ if (i%fs == 0) ll="\n"; else
> > ll=""; print value2[i] - value1[i] ll }; print "\n" }'
>
> /proc/schedstat is already a massive pain to interpret and then you go
> and mangle things even more and expect me to try and understand that
> crap? I don't think so, life is too short.
>
> > BTW, the imbalance increasing is due to the SCALE increase about 1024.
>
> > Any ideas of this?
>
> What happens if you try something like the below. Increased imbalance
> might lead to more load-balance action, which might lead to more task
> migration/waking up of cpus etc.
>
> If the below makes any difference, Nikhil's changes have a funny that
> needs to be caught.

Yes, it most remove the commit effect, So the power recovered.

In fact the only suspicious I found is large imbalance, but that it is
the commit want to...



--
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/