Re: [RFC PATCH v3 5/6] sched: pack the idle load balance

[Arjan van de Ven]

On 4/22/2013 7:23 PM, Alex Shi wrote:
> Thanks you, Preeti and Vincent to talk the power aware scheduler for
> details! believe this open discussion is helpful to conduct a a more
> comprehensive solution. :)
>
> > Hi Preeti,
> >
> > I have had a look at Alex patches but i have some concerns with his patches
> > -There no notion of power domain which is quite important when we speak
> > about power saving IMHO. Packing tasks has got an interest if the idle
> > CPUs can reach a useful low power state independently from busy CPUs.
> > Architectures have different low power state capabilities which must be
> > taken into account. In addition, you can have system which have CPUs
> > with better power efficiency and this kind of system are not taken into
> > account.
>
> I agree with you on this point. and like what's you done to add new flag
> in sched domain.

For x86 we should not be setting such flag then; we don't have a way for some cpu packages to
go to an extra deep power state if they're completely idle.
(this afaik is true for both Intel and AMD)



--
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/