On Thursday 05 October 2006 06:41, Olof Johansson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Without this patch, on an idle system I get:
>
> cpu-power-0:21.638
> cpu-power-1:27.102
> cpu-power-2:29.343
> cpu-power-3:25.784
> Total: 103.8W
>
> With this patch:
>
> cpu-power-0:11.730
> cpu-power-1:17.185
> cpu-power-2:18.547
> cpu-power-3:17.528
> Total: 65.0W
>
> If I lower HZ to 100, I can get it as low as:
>
> cpu-power-0:10.938
> cpu-power-1:16.021
> cpu-power-2:17.245
> cpu-power-3:16.145
> Total: 60.2W
>
> Another (older) Quad G5 went from 54W to 39W at HZ=250.
>
> Coming back out of Deep Nap takes 40-70 cycles longer than coming back
> from just Nap (which already takes quite a while). I don't think it'll
> be a performance issue (interrupt latency on an idle system), but in
> case someone does measurements feel free to report them.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Olof Johansson <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Michael Buesch <[email protected]>
I am running DEEPNAP on my Quad since quite some time and I
did not see any problems.
It saves quite a bit of power (I think it was about 20W for me when
I measured it)
That's really worth it.
--
Greetings Michael.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]