[procps] Re: C-States handling - new switch?
- From: Jim Warner <james.warner@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: procps@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 04:48:48 -0600
On Feb 8, 2012, at 4:31 AM, Jaromir Capik wrote:
>
> The delay interval was/is included. Just look at the very first line ...
> ... 0.25s
Hi Jaromir,
Oops, sorry.
> I believe that such scenario is possible. Turning the CPU off and on
> is quite cheap operation and thus can be done very quickly and faster
> changes can bring more energy savings.
First, you should start using the procps-ng top. He's up to 300% faster than
top-3.2.8. As a result, I believe you'll find quite different results with
that delay interval of .25.
Second, .25 is not a reasonable real-life interval, it just wastes cpu cycles.
Third, the smaller the interval the fewer elapsed tics will be registered per
cpu. There is no way to prevent that and there is no way to scale those
results down given our limitation of tenths of a percentage.
By the way, I have a version of top I use locally that gives the frequency of
memory/cpu updates over to user control. I've limited that version to no more
often than 1/second. With that kind of interval, there is no way to distort
cpu percentages and I believe all your concerns over percentages would
disappear.
Would you like to try it?
Regards,
Jim
Other related posts:
