Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732 | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Date | Sat, 09 Apr 2016 17:10:22 +0200 |
| |
On Sat, 2016-04-09 at 14:33 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 8:40 AM, Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 22:59 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > > > > Cute, I thought you used governor=performance for your runs? > > > > > > > > I do, and those numbers are with it thus set. > > > > > > Well, this is a trade-off. > > > > > > 4.5 introduced a power regression here so this one goes back to the previous > > > state of things. > > > > That sounds somewhat reasonable. Too bad I don't have a super duper > > watt meter handy.. seeing that you really really are saving me money > > would perhaps make me less fond of those prettier numbers. > > You can look at the turbostat Watts numbers ("turbostat --debug" and > the last three columns of the output in turbostat as included in the > kernel source).
Hm. I think I want my prettier numbers back.
714KHz/877KHz = 0.81 25Watt/30Watt = 0.83
-Mike
| |