Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 25 Apr 2015 11:05:45 -0700
From:      Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
To:        "K. Macy" <kmacy@freebsd.org>
Cc:        "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: RFC: setting performance_cx_lowest=C2 in -HEAD to avoid lock contention on many-CPU boxes
Message-ID:  <CAJ-Vmo=mb1SB6xwj=3i12jbyVWQr2O9z5OTRR=5U%2BytB=cbCLA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHM0Q_N0h2khSSQwpAmqV361N2e%2BsB4pFg5MTO8%2BtQNzZGmDdg@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAJ-VmonG%2By5gzoYmer70KAswUorvezcZxRSDsQWj47=jsAZ71w@mail.gmail.com> <CAHM0Q_NuvZH0GGs-J9xniyt2PZ0qb_kjOaanVOaCxzD0CVzGYg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-Vmo=6ej6b52yoknP_piL5uJYHm_1AxZh7=6AFGuqMO4sLVg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmokhS7KLxq0fVRjDaR3naEMORei07=49SoiP2bSQXog8WQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAHM0Q_N0h2khSSQwpAmqV361N2e%2BsB4pFg5MTO8%2BtQNzZGmDdg@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 25 April 2015 at 11:02, K. Macy <kmacy@freebsd.org> wrote:
> Um, don't you care more about power savings when it's on battery?

right, that's what I'm changing performance_cx_lowest, and not
economy_cx_lowest.

performance == AC power
economy == battery

> On Apr 25, 2015 10:44 AM, "Adrian Chadd" <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>
>> Oh the other thing, which I just mentioned to kip in IRC - all of the
>> intel laptops I've tested (and that's a long list) don't enter CPU C7
>> if the power is plugged in.
>>
>> Ie:
>>
>> * power in, ACPI C2 -> CPU C6
>> * power in, ACPI C3 - CPU C6
>> * battery - ACPI C2 -> CPU C6
>> * battery -> ACPI C3 -> CPU C7
>>
>> So having performance_cx_lowest=C3 is effectively a no-op on the
>> devices that it'd matter on, so it's okay to just flip it to C2.
>>
>>
>>
>> -adrian



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-Vmo=mb1SB6xwj=3i12jbyVWQr2O9z5OTRR=5U%2BytB=cbCLA>