From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 2 19:49:41 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08B5816A41A for ; Fri, 2 Nov 2007 19:49:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nevans@talkpoint.com) Received: from mailbox.talkpoint.com (mailbox.talkpoint.com [204.141.15.162]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B11213C48D for ; Fri, 2 Nov 2007 19:49:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nevans@talkpoint.com) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailbox.talkpoint.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06D58458004; Fri, 2 Nov 2007 15:48:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.466 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.466 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.133, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mailbox.talkpoint.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mailbox.talkpoint.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JG7Foq2pOuKH; Fri, 2 Nov 2007 15:48:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pleiades.nextvenue.com (pleiades.nextvenue.com [204.141.15.194]) by mailbox.talkpoint.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08EB9458002; Fri, 2 Nov 2007 15:48:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 15:48:00 -0400 From: Nick Evans To: Jeff Roberson Message-ID: <20071102154800.3ae9ac99@pleiades.nextvenue.com> In-Reply-To: <20071102102331.G544@10.0.0.1> References: <8cb6106e0710230902x4edf2c8eu2d912d5de1f5d4a2@mail.gmail.com> <20071024111105.M598@10.0.0.1> <8cb6106e0710241229i12852d8cq436f4c955ac62c56@mail.gmail.com> <20071024133240.X598@10.0.0.1> <8cb6106e0710251925s2db0117cvcb67321b08d7b2a1@mail.gmail.com> <20071102102331.G544@10.0.0.1> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 2.8.0 (GTK+ 2.10.9; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Josh Carroll , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ULE vs. 4BSD in RELENG_7 X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 19:49:41 -0000 > This is interesting. I have had a couple of laptop users report success > in using lower power saving modes with ULE. Are these core temp > observations repeatable? > > Thanks, > Jeff > > > > > Thanks again for all your help! Please let me know if/when I can do > > anything else to help out. > > > > Regards, > > Josh > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > > "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" After this was mentioned I tried coretemp on my 8-core system and am seeing the same behavior. Idle: dev.cpu.0.temperature: 48 dev.cpu.1.temperature: 45 dev.cpu.2.temperature: 41 dev.cpu.3.temperature: 41 dev.cpu.4.temperature: 44 dev.cpu.5.temperature: 44 dev.cpu.6.temperature: 41 dev.cpu.7.temperature: 42 After 10-15 minutes of 8 distributed.net crunchers running: dev.cpu.0.temperature: 63 dev.cpu.1.temperature: 59 dev.cpu.2.temperature: 55 dev.cpu.3.temperature: 54 dev.cpu.4.temperature: 58 dev.cpu.5.temperature: 59 dev.cpu.6.temperature: 56 dev.cpu.7.temperature: 56 Interesting distribution. Cores 2, 3, 6 and 7 consistently run cooler than 0, 1, 4 and 5. This behavior has been consistent since I started looking at it a few days ago. Is there anyway to tell which package a particular core is attached to or is it sequential 0-3 on package 1, 4-7 on package 2? Nick