* Andreas Mohr <[email protected]> wrote:
> The results are (waited for values to settle down each time):
>
> -dyntick4, C1, CONFIG_NO_HZ:
> 83.9W KDE idle, 95.2W bash while 1
> -dyntick4, C2 (C1-only hack disabled, kernel rebuilt), CONFIG_NO_HZ off:
> 84.4W KDE idle, 95.4W bash while 1
> -dyntick4, acpi=off (i.e. APM active), -dynticks:
> 85.5W KDE idle, 95.5W bash while 1
>
> Bet you didn't see this coming...
interesting that there's any savings from dynticks in this workload.
When the CPU is busy then dynticks generates the usual HZ scheduler
tick.
could you try the same measurement with a completely idle system too?
That is where dynticks has its true effects: longer idle intervals. (but
even on an idle system dynticks might not make a difference unless the
hardware can utilize the much larger and more predictable idle times
that dynticks offers.)
Ingo
-
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]
