Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 01:13:42 +0000 From: Josef Karthauser <joe@FreeBSD.org> To: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Cc: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, Wilko Bulte <wkb@freebie.xs4all.nl>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Nate Lawson <njl@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/acpica acpi_cpu.c Message-ID: <20030115011342.GA5983@genius.tao.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20030114230057.81B422A89E@canning.wemm.org> References: <20030114173224.A74488@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20030114230057.81B422A89E@canning.wemm.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 03:00:57PM -0800, Peter Wemm wrote: > > FWIW, we see a (measured) difference of about 50W on 2.2GHz P4's simply by > turning machdep.cpu_idle_hlt on and off. I expect the clock throttling > would make similar differences. For 1U rack-mount systems (especially in > California) this is a Big Deal. > Which way's the way to reduce the power consumption? I would guess 'machdep.cpu_idle_hlt=1', but as that appears to be the default I thought I'd ask. Joe -- Josef Karthauser (joe@tao.org.uk) http://www.josef-k.net/ FreeBSD (cvs meister, admin and hacker) http://www.uk.FreeBSD.org/ Physics Particle Theory (student) http://www.pact.cpes.sussex.ac.uk/ ================ An eclectic mix of fact and theory. ================= [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAj4ktcUACgkQXVIcjOaxUBYeLwCdEVgb4IjnDM0XTmH7cpcojQir SfIAn2olNbW4mFQv8aXIRrWuXsA4t2bB =TcBn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030115011342.GA5983>