Edward Pilatowicz wrote: > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 07:09:04PM -0700, Pawel Wojcik wrote: > >> On 05/19/09 06:23 PM, Edward Pilatowicz wrote: >> >>> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 10:37:45AM -0700, Terry Whatley wrote: >>> >>> >>>> 4.3.4 disk power attribute driver properties >>>> >>>> sd(7D) will export a set of driver properties to indicate a disk's >>>> power attributes. See Table-2. >>>> >>>> Table-1 Disk Power Attribute Properties (array properties are indexed >>>> by power state in order of ascending power levels) >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> Prop Name Prop Type | Prop Description >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> "pm-resource-type" String | "resource-spindle-disk" for the >>>> | spindle disks >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> "pm-perf" Integer array | array of average R/W >>>> | performance percentages >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> "pm-pwr-saving" Integer array | array of average power saving in >>>> | units of 0.1watt >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> "pm-latency" Integer array | array of time to first data in units >>>> | of 100ms >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> exporting performance statistics via device properties seems weird to >>> me. is there a precedent for this? why isn't this information being >>> exported via kstats? do we really want to train users to start using >>> prtconf -v to get performance data? >>> >>> ed >>> >>> >> I think these are not performance statistics. I believe that these are >> static arrays that are specific for a device type (most likely Sun disks >> only), that correlate specific power level with performance and power >> savings. These properties, I believe, are to be used by a storage power >> manager to decide at what power level disk should run at given time. >> Jane Chu may correct me here... >> -Pawel >> >>
That is correct. > > if that's the case then having them as device properties seems ok, but > documentation for these properties should make it clear that these are > not actual system performance numbers. > > ed > As consolidation private interfaces, these will not be documented, aside from this case. -sarito
