Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

[Andrew Morton]

On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 18:15:21 -0700 Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 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)

(head spinning a bit).  Could you please expand on this rather a lot?

--
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/