On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 03:53:41PM +1030, David Newall wrote:Ok for one more (but last) time: Throttling just lowers the short term heat spikes to prevent short term damage to the silicon. For that it focusses on lowering the absolute temperature at a given point. That only applies when the CPU is busy. But for total power consumption (or rather more concretly conserving your battery) you don't care about absolute temperature at a given point (as long as it is not high enough that it destroys the CPU) you care about how much power is consumed (and heat generated from that) averaged out over a longer time. And for most typical workloads (not running endless loops; significant idle time) throttling makes no difference and in fact often (especially on laptop CPUs with deeper sleep modi like the original reported had one) makes it likely worse (see previous mails for details why) Frankly that's fine for me. I don't really feel any need to convince you. I can live with your metal model of CPU physics not being accurate. -Andi (feeling a bit like a broken record) --
| Andrew Morton | Re: Linux 2.6.21-rc4 |
| Andrew Morton | -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
| Balbir Singh | Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 15/37] dccp: Set per-connection CCIDs via socket options |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Andreas Henriksson | [PATCH 06/12] Remove bogus reference to tc-filters(8) from tc(8) manpage. |
| Jarek Poplawski | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
