Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-21 Thread Thomas Renninger
Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050419 14:10]: >>Hi! >> >>>The machine is a Pentium M 2.00 GHz, supporting C0-C4 processor power states. >>>The machine run at 2.00 GHz all the time. >>.. >>>_passing bm_history=0x (default) to processor module:_ >>> >>>Average

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-21 Thread Thomas Renninger
Tony Lindgren wrote: * Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050419 14:10]: Hi! The machine is a Pentium M 2.00 GHz, supporting C0-C4 processor power states. The machine run at 2.00 GHz all the time. .. _passing bm_history=0x (default) to processor module:_ Average current the last 470

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-20 Thread Tony Lindgren
* Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050419 14:10]: > Hi! > > > The machine is a Pentium M 2.00 GHz, supporting C0-C4 processor power > > states. > > The machine run at 2.00 GHz all the time. > .. > > _passing bm_history=0x (default) to processor module:_ > > > > Average current the last

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-20 Thread Thomas Renninger
Dominik Brodowski wrote: > On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 11:03:30PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote: >>>"All" we need to do is to update the "diff". Without dynamic ticks, if the >>>idle loop didn't get called each jiffy, it was a big hint that there was so >>>much activity in between, and if there is

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-20 Thread Dominik Brodowski
Hi, On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 02:08:46PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > Like "ipw2x00 looses packets" if this happens too often? See "PCI latency error if C3 enabled" on http://ipw2100.sf.net -- it causes network instability, frequent firmware restarts. Dominik - To unsubscribe from this

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-20 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > > > > Because I don't consider whether there was bm_activity the last ms, I > > > > only > > > > consider the average, it seems to happen that I try to trigger > > > > C3/C4 when there is just something copied and some bm active ?!? > > > > > > I don't think that this is perfect

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-20 Thread Dominik Brodowski
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 01:57:39PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > > Because I don't consider whether there was bm_activity the last ms, I only > > > consider the average, it seems to happen that I try to trigger > > > C3/C4 when there is just something copied and some bm active ?!? > > >

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-20 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > > Because I don't consider whether there was bm_activity the last ms, I only > > consider the average, it seems to happen that I try to trigger > > C3/C4 when there is just something copied and some bm active ?!? > > I don't think that this is perfect behaviour: if the system is idle, and

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-20 Thread Dominik Brodowski
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 11:03:30PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote: > > "All" we need to do is to update the "diff". Without dynamic ticks, if the > > idle loop didn't get called each jiffy, it was a big hint that there was so > > much activity in between, and if there is activity, there is most

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-20 Thread Dominik Brodowski
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 11:03:30PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote: All we need to do is to update the diff. Without dynamic ticks, if the idle loop didn't get called each jiffy, it was a big hint that there was so much activity in between, and if there is activity, there is most likely also

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-20 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! Because I don't consider whether there was bm_activity the last ms, I only consider the average, it seems to happen that I try to trigger C3/C4 when there is just something copied and some bm active ?!? I don't think that this is perfect behaviour: if the system is idle, and there

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-20 Thread Dominik Brodowski
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 01:57:39PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: Hi! Because I don't consider whether there was bm_activity the last ms, I only consider the average, it seems to happen that I try to trigger C3/C4 when there is just something copied and some bm active ?!? I don't

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-20 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! Because I don't consider whether there was bm_activity the last ms, I only consider the average, it seems to happen that I try to trigger C3/C4 when there is just something copied and some bm active ?!? I don't think that this is perfect behaviour: if the system is

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-20 Thread Dominik Brodowski
Hi, On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 02:08:46PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: Like ipw2x00 looses packets if this happens too often? See PCI latency error if C3 enabled on http://ipw2100.sf.net -- it causes network instability, frequent firmware restarts. Dominik - To unsubscribe from this list:

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-20 Thread Thomas Renninger
Dominik Brodowski wrote: On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 11:03:30PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote: All we need to do is to update the diff. Without dynamic ticks, if the idle loop didn't get called each jiffy, it was a big hint that there was so much activity in between, and if there is activity, there

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-20 Thread Tony Lindgren
* Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050419 14:10]: Hi! The machine is a Pentium M 2.00 GHz, supporting C0-C4 processor power states. The machine run at 2.00 GHz all the time. .. _passing bm_history=0x (default) to processor module:_ Average current the last 470 seconds:

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-19 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > The machine is a Pentium M 2.00 GHz, supporting C0-C4 processor power states. > The machine run at 2.00 GHz all the time. .. > _passing bm_history=0x (default) to processor module:_ > > Average current the last 470 seconds: *1986mA* (also measured better > values ~1800, does

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-19 Thread Thomas Renninger
Reducing the CC'd people a bit ... Dominik Brodowski wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 04:56:56PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote: >>If CONFIG_IDLE_HZ is set, the c-state will be evaluated on >>three control values (averages of the last 4 measures): >> >>a) idle_ms -> if machine was active

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-19 Thread Dominik Brodowski
Hi, On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 04:56:56PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote: > If CONFIG_IDLE_HZ is set, the c-state will be evaluated on > three control values (averages of the last 4 measures): > > a) idle_ms -> if machine was active for longer than this >value (avg), the machine is assumed to

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-19 Thread Thomas Renninger
Here are some figures (I used your pmstats): The machine is a Pentium M 2.00 GHz, supporting C0-C4 processor power states. The machine run at 2.00 GHz all the time. A lot of modules (pcmcia, usb, ...) where loaded, services that could produce load where stopped -> processor is mostly idle.

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-19 Thread Thomas Renninger
Here are some figures (I used your pmstats): The machine is a Pentium M 2.00 GHz, supporting C0-C4 processor power states. The machine run at 2.00 GHz all the time. A lot of modules (pcmcia, usb, ...) where loaded, services that could produce load where stopped - processor is mostly idle.

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-19 Thread Dominik Brodowski
Hi, On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 04:56:56PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote: If CONFIG_IDLE_HZ is set, the c-state will be evaluated on three control values (averages of the last 4 measures): a) idle_ms - if machine was active for longer than this value (avg), the machine is assumed to not be

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-19 Thread Thomas Renninger
Reducing the CC'd people a bit ... Dominik Brodowski wrote: Hi, On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 04:56:56PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote: If CONFIG_IDLE_HZ is set, the c-state will be evaluated on three control values (averages of the last 4 measures): a) idle_ms - if machine was active for longer

Re: [PATCH] Updated: Dynamic Tick version 050408-1 - C-state measures

2005-04-19 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! The machine is a Pentium M 2.00 GHz, supporting C0-C4 processor power states. The machine run at 2.00 GHz all the time. .. _passing bm_history=0x (default) to processor module:_ Average current the last 470 seconds: *1986mA* (also measured better values ~1800, does battery