Eric Saxe wrote:
> David Vengerov wrote:
>> Eric Saxe wrote:
>>
>>> David Vengerov wrote:
>>>
>>>> Eric Saxe wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If there are N or more running threads in an N-CPU system, then 
>>>>> utilization is at 100%. Generally, i'm thinking that the CPUs 
>>>>> should all be clocked up, if we want to maximize performance. 
>>>>> There's not much opportunity to squander power in this case. It's 
>>>>> really only the "partial utilization" scenario, where power is 
>>>>> being directed at the part of the system that isn't being used. 
>>>>
>>>> If you hold this view, then the policy I described previously that 
>>>> decides on the clock rate of idle CPUs based on how their number 
>>>> has fluctuated in the past should be very relevant and allows us to 
>>>> find the desired tradeoff between maximizing the the system's 
>>>> performance (by never clocking down the idle CPUs) and minimizing 
>>>> the power consumption (by running idle CPUs at the lowest power and 
>>>> increasing their clock rate only when they receive some threads). 
>>>> The policy I am envisioning should be able to clock down CPUs to 
>>>> different extents based on estimated probabilities of some of them 
>>>> receiving threads in the near future.
>>>
>>>
>>> Where I think this is especially relevant is where there exists a 
>>> non-trivial amount of time to bring online additional resources 
>>> (latency). If ML techniques can help predict when utilization will 
>>> increase/decrease, then perhaps the latency associated with bringing 
>>> online/offline the additional capacity can be better hidden. In the 
>>> data center context, where the unit of power management may be 
>>> suspended / powered off systems, this could be significant. 
>>
>> Right. What latency do you expect in AMD and Intel systems? 
>
> For P-state (frequency/voltage scaling) of processors, I believe the 
> latencies involved are very low.
Doesn't it depend on the specific chip?  I believe the Intel Enhanced 
Speed Step
are pretty quick to change state, but Opteron changes are more involved.
Mark - any observations here?

Dana



Reply via email to