lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Dec]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v7 0/8] Tunable sched_mc_power_savings=n
    * MinChan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com> [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


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-12-30 03:51    [W:0.025 / U:358.400 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site