Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-11-12 Thread Srivatsa S. Bhat
On 11/12/2013 01:32 PM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: > On 09/26/2013 06:28 PM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >> On 09/26/2013 05:10 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: >>> On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 04:56:32 +0530 "Srivatsa S. Bhat" >>> wrote: >>> Experimental Results: Test setup: >>>

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-11-12 Thread Srivatsa S. Bhat
On 11/12/2013 11:04 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 11/12/2013 12:02 AM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >> I performed experiments on an IBM POWER 7 machine and got actual >> power-savings >> numbers (upto 2.6% of total system power) from this patchset. I presented >> them >> at the Kernel Summit but forgot

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-11-12 Thread Dave Hansen
On 11/12/2013 12:02 AM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: > I performed experiments on an IBM POWER 7 machine and got actual power-savings > numbers (upto 2.6% of total system power) from this patchset. I presented them > at the Kernel Summit but forgot to post them on LKML. So here they are: "upto"? What

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-11-12 Thread Srivatsa S. Bhat
On 09/26/2013 06:28 PM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: > On 09/26/2013 05:10 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 04:56:32 +0530 "Srivatsa S. Bhat" >> wrote: >> >>> Experimental Results: >>> >>> >>> Test setup: >>> -- >>> >>> x86 Sandybridge dual-socket quad core

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-26 Thread Srivatsa S. Bhat
On 09/26/2013 11:36 PM, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > Arjan, are you referring to the fact that Intel/SNB systems can exploit memory self-refresh only when the entire system goes idle? Is that why this patchset won't turn out to be that useful on those platforms? >>> >>> no

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-26 Thread Arjan van de Ven
Arjan, are you referring to the fact that Intel/SNB systems can exploit memory self-refresh only when the entire system goes idle? Is that why this patchset won't turn out to be that useful on those platforms? no we can use other things (CKE and co) all the time. Ah, ok.. just that we fo

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-26 Thread Srivatsa S. Bhat
On 09/26/2013 09:28 PM, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On 9/26/2013 6:42 AM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >> On 09/26/2013 08:29 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: >>> On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 03:50:16 +0200 Andi Kleen >>> wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 06:21:29PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 25 Sep

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-26 Thread Arjan van de Ven
On 9/26/2013 6:42 AM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: On 09/26/2013 08:29 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 03:50:16 +0200 Andi Kleen wrote: On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 06:21:29PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 18:15:21 -0700 Arjan van de Ven wrote: On 9/25/2013 4:47 PM,

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-26 Thread Arjan van de Ven
On 9/26/2013 5:58 AM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: Let me explain the challenge I am facing. A prototype powerpc platform that I work with has the capability to transition memory banks to content-preserving low-power states at a per-socket granularity. What that means is that we can get memory power s

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-26 Thread Arjan van de Ven
On 9/25/2013 6:21 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 18:15:21 -0700 Arjan van de Ven wrote: On 9/25/2013 4:47 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: Also, the changelogs don't appear to discuss one obvious downside: the latency incurred in bringing a bank out of one of the low-power states and back

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-26 Thread Srivatsa S. Bhat
On 09/26/2013 08:29 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 03:50:16 +0200 Andi Kleen wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 06:21:29PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >>> On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 18:15:21 -0700 Arjan van de Ven >>> wrote: >>> On 9/25/2013 4:47 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: >> Also

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-26 Thread Srivatsa S. Bhat
On 09/26/2013 07:20 AM, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 06:21:29PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 18:15:21 -0700 Arjan van de Ven >> wrote: >> >>> On 9/25/2013 4:47 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: > Also, the changelogs don't appear to discuss one obvious downside: the >

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-26 Thread Srivatsa S. Bhat
On 09/26/2013 06:45 AM, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On 9/25/2013 4:47 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: >>> Also, the changelogs don't appear to discuss one obvious downside: the >>> latency incurred in bringing a bank out of one of the low-power states >>> and back into full operation. Please do discuss and qu

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-26 Thread Srivatsa S. Bhat
On 09/26/2013 06:44 AM, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On 9/25/2013 4:47 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: >>> Also, the changelogs don't appear to discuss one obvious downside: the >>> latency incurred in bringing a bank out of one of the low-power states >>> and back into full operation. Please do discuss and qu

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-26 Thread Srivatsa S. Bhat
On 09/26/2013 05:10 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 04:56:32 +0530 "Srivatsa S. Bhat" > wrote: > >> Experimental Results: >> >> >> Test setup: >> -- >> >> x86 Sandybridge dual-socket quad core HT-enabled machine, with 128GB RAM. >> Memory Region size =

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-25 Thread Andrew Morton
On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 03:50:16 +0200 Andi Kleen wrote: > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 06:21:29PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 18:15:21 -0700 Arjan van de Ven > > wrote: > > > > > On 9/25/2013 4:47 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > >> Also, the changelogs don't appear to discuss one o

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-25 Thread Andi Kleen
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 06:21:29PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 18:15:21 -0700 Arjan van de Ven > wrote: > > > On 9/25/2013 4:47 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: > > >> Also, the changelogs don't appear to discuss one obvious downside: the > > >> latency incurred in bringing a bank out

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-25 Thread Andrew Morton
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 18:15:21 -0700 Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On 9/25/2013 4:47 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: > >> Also, the changelogs don't appear to discuss one obvious downside: the > >> latency incurred in bringing a bank out of one of the low-power states > >> and back into full operation. Please

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-25 Thread Arjan van de Ven
On 9/25/2013 4:47 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: Also, the changelogs don't appear to discuss one obvious downside: the latency incurred in bringing a bank out of one of the low-power states and back into full operation. Please do discuss and quantify that to the best of your knowledge. On Sandy Bridge

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-25 Thread Arjan van de Ven
On 9/25/2013 4:47 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: Also, the changelogs don't appear to discuss one obvious downside: the latency incurred in bringing a bank out of one of the low-power states and back into full operation. Please do discuss and quantify that to the best of your knowledge. On Sandy Bridge

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-25 Thread Andi Kleen
> Also, the changelogs don't appear to discuss one obvious downside: the > latency incurred in bringing a bank out of one of the low-power states > and back into full operation. Please do discuss and quantify that to > the best of your knowledge. On Sandy Bridge the memry wakeup overhead is reall

Re: [Results] [RFC PATCH v4 00/40] mm: Memory Power Management

2013-09-25 Thread Andrew Morton
On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 04:56:32 +0530 "Srivatsa S. Bhat" wrote: > Experimental Results: > > > Test setup: > -- > > x86 Sandybridge dual-socket quad core HT-enabled machine, with 128GB RAM. > Memory Region size = 512MB. Yes, but how much power was saved ;) Also, the