[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-devel] Workings/effectiveness of the xen-acpi-processor driver
Since there have been requests about that driver to get backported into 3.2, I was interested to find out what or how much would be gained by that. The first system I tried was an AMD based one (8 core Opteron 6128@2GHz). Which was not very successful as the drivers bail out of the init function because the first call to acpi_processor_register_performance() returns -ENODEV. There is some frequency scaling when running without Xen, so I need to do some more debugging there. The second system was an Intel one (4 core i7 920@xxxxxxx) which was successfully loading the driver. Via xenpm I can see the various frequencies and also see them being changed. However the cpuidle data out of xenpm looks a bit odd: #> xenpm get-cpuidle-states 0 Max C-state: C7 cpu id : 0 total C-states : 2 idle time(ms) : 10819311 C0 : transition [00000000000000000001] residency [00000000000000005398 ms] C1 : transition [00000000000000000001] residency [00000000000010819311 ms] pc3 : [00000000000000000000 ms] pc6 : [00000000000000000000 ms] pc7 : [00000000000000000000 ms] cc3 : [00000000000000000000 ms] cc6 : [00000000000000000000 ms] Also gathering samples over 30s does look like only C0 and C1 are used. This might be because C1E support is enabled in BIOS but when looking at the intel_idle data in sysfs when running without a hypervisor will show C3 and C6 for the cores. That could have been just a wrong output, so I plugged in a power meter and compared a kernel running natively and running as dom0 (with and without the acpi-processor driver). Native: 175W dom0: 183W (with only marginal difference between with or without the processor driver) [yes, the system has a somewhat high base consumption which I attribute to a ridiculously dimensioned graphics subsystem to be running a text console] This I would take as C3 and C6 really not being used and the frequency scaling having no impact on the idle system is not that much surprising. But if that was true it would also limit the usefulness of the turbo mode which I understand would also be limited by the c-state of the other cores. Do I misread the data I see? Or maybe its a known limitation? In case it is worth doing more research I'll gladly try things and gather more data. Thanks, Stefan Attachment:
signature.asc _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |