Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 13 May 2009 19:12:51 +0530 | From | Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] Saving power by cpu evacuationsched_max_capacity_pct=n |
| |
* Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> [2009-05-13 15:14:57]:
> On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 18:41 +0530, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: > > > * Peter Zijlstra wanted more justifications for throttling at the core > > level. Throttling may be a resource management problem rather than > > scheduler/load balancer > > No, I mandate that it be thermal management. Any other reason and you've > got a NAK.
Hi Peter,
Yes, I understand your objection. Your want throttling to be done for the purpose of thermal management only. The primary purpose for throttling should be thermal management (power savings may be a side-effect)
What I meant in the above comment was that the implementation for throttling could be solved using resource management framework, cpuset/cgroup rather than biasing the load balancer to avoid work on a particular core.
I am open to ideas for a clean and easy framework for core level throttling.
Thanks, Vaidy
| |