On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 11:40 PM, Aubrey Li<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Sebastien Roy<[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Sat, 2009-09-05 at 16:31 +0800, Aubrey Li wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Sebastien Roy<[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > On Sat, 2009-09-05 at 10:38 +0800, Aubrey Li wrote:
>>> >  I wonder what changed.
>>>
>>> to put this simply, the default mode is event driving, which makes the 
>>> p-state
>>> transition decision by several sampling points. It's more aggressive.
>>>
>>> "poll-mode" makes the transition decision by a tunable sampling period. The
>>> period is 1s on your system (cpu-threshold 1s). It's more stable.
>>
>> Hmm, is it then possible that when event driven mode is used, powertop
>> simply can't observe the lower p-states because of its probe effect?
>>
>
> I'm not clear what powertop reports on your system. Assume that you are using
> powertop V1.2. Did you see 100% highest p-state residency?
>
> The alternative way is checking the current clock by kstat
> $ kstat -i 1 | grep current_clock_Hz
>
> You could check it from time to time (10s or longer maybe), the instance
> option(-i) here helps to reduce the load effect.
>
> Need to mention, I upgraded my system(24 logical cores) to b122 just now and
> tried powertop in event mode. I saw 100% lowest frequency residency on my 
> side.
>

hmm..., I should watch powertop report longer.
Actually, I occasionally saw 100% lowest frequency residency, sometimes ~90%
pn and ~10% p0, and the worst case, 50% pn and 50% p0.

Sometimes the sampling points are just idle so we saw 100% or 90% lowest p-state
residency, but sometimes the sampling points flick to a load, so we
saw higher P0
residency. This is sort of unacceptable.

-Aubrey
_______________________________________________
indiana-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss

Reply via email to