Li, Aubrey wrote: > Rafael Vanoni Polanczyk wrote: > > >> Aubrey Li wrote: >> >>> 2008/6/23 Rafael Vanoni <Rafael.Vanoni at sun.com>: >>> >>>> Forgot to zero cstate_info[i].events, here's the correct diff. >>>> >>>> >>> Thanks for the great work, :-) >>> This one looks good except this: >>> >>> -static char cpupm_treshold[] = " echo cpu-threshold 1s >> >>> /etc/power.conf"; +static char cpupm_treshold[] = " echo >>> cpu-threshold 5s >> /etc/power.conf"; >>> >>> why do we need this change? >>> >>> >> Sorry I didn't comment this one before. 1s seems a bit too little, >> don't you think? I can't remember the default, tho. >> >> thanks >> rafael >> > > Not really, intel processor can switch very quickly (in microseconds). > That's why we are working on the subsecond p-state. So here, we should > set this threshold as small as possible, 1s is the right value. >
I've not really been following this thread. But why is this change being proposed and is the proposal that the change be a productized change to Solaris? If so, please don't. I'm currently looking into making this same change, enabling CPU power management by default and modifying the Solaris PM framework to scan CPU devices once a second: 6647538 cpupm should be on by default 6714184 x86 CPU power management could be a little more aggressive. Just changing cpu-threshold to 1 second (as I think you are proposing above) isn't going to have much effect without the changes I'm planning with the CRs above. Also, I'm currently running these changes through our PerfPIT to see if they will have any impact on performance. Sorry, if I've misunderstood the intent and for not following this thread more closely. Mark > Thanks, > -Aubrey > _______________________________________________ > tesla-dev mailing list > tesla-dev at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/tesla-dev >
