Li, Aubrey wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: tesla-dev-bounces at opensolaris.org [mailto:tesla-dev-
>> bounces at opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Mark Haywood
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 1:51 AM
>> To: Cyril Plisko
>> Cc: tesla-dev at opensolaris.org
>> Subject: Re: [tesla-dev] Power Consumption test
>>
>> Cyril Plisko wrote:
>>> On 7/23/07, Mark Haywood <Mark.Haywood at sun.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Aubrey Li wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/23/07, Cyril Plisko <cyril.plisko at mountall.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/23/07, Aubrey Li <aubreylee at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi list,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> I checked just now, between Build67 and hg tip revision 4700. There
>>>>> are no big difference.
>>>>>
>>>> Forgive my ignorance. What is the hg tip revision 4700?
>>>>
>>> ON consolidation at revision 4700, I guess. 4700 seems to be
>>> the latest revision as of Jul 22. Build 67 was revision 4444.
>>>
>> Thanks. I better get used to Mercurial. I downloaded the latest source
>> and verified that revision 4700 does include the SpeedStep support.
> It's
>> not enabled by default in Solaris. You have to enable it by editing
>> power.conf(4) and adding the following entries:
>>
>> cpupm                enable
>> cpu-threshold    15s
>>
>> And then in order to inform the kernel of the new policy, you must run
>> pmconfig(1M).
>> Alternatively, you could use the /usr/dt/bin/dtpower  GUI.
> 
> OK, I'll enable it and rerun the test.
> The question is, if the feature improves the power management, why not
> enable it by default?

Because some users care more about performance than power and unless we 
have reason to think otherwise, we favor those who want performance. 
Currently, none of our x86 platforms are power managed by default. 
That's likely to change in the future when we identify systems that we 
would like to be E* compliant.

>> As far as the comparison against Linux though, it makes no sense to
>> enable CPU power management on Solaris if it wasn't enabled on Linux.
>>
> Sure, we should be based on the same situation.
> 
> -Aubrey


Reply via email to