* Con Kolivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050804 00:16]: > On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 05:04 pm, Con Kolivas wrote: > > On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 04:59 pm, Jim MacBaine wrote: > > > I just borrowed a power meter to see (or not to see) real effects of > > > dyntick. The difference between static 1000 HZ and dynamic HZ is much > > > less than I expected, only a very little about noise. With dyntick > > > disabled at 1000 HZ my laptop needs 31,3 W. With dyntick enabled I > > > get 29.8 W, the pmstats-0.2 script shows me that the system is at > > > 35-45 HZ when it is idle. > > > > > > The power consumption difference between 250 HZ static and dyntick is > > > below the noise, so maybe hardly worth all the struggle. > > > > That's not the point. We want the power savings without sacrificing the > > extra ticks if we need them. > > Oh but thank you very much for confirming the power savings are around the 5% > mark. If we don't measure we won't know (and everything else is mental > masturbation according to Linus ;)).
Dyntick on it's own does not do much. But it allows adding better PM code later on. Tony - 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/
