Slashdot Log In
Intel's PowerTOP Extends Linux Battery Life
Posted by
kdawson
on Thu May 17, 2007 11:32 AM
from the using-the-hooks dept.
from the using-the-hooks dept.
DuracellFan writes "Intel recently released its PowerTOP utility, which builds on work done by kernel developers to make the Linux kernel power-efficient. PowerTOP gives a snapshot of what apps are consuming the most power. The PowerTOP website also hosts patches for several Linux apps and the kernel. In the Linux.com article, lead PowerTOP developer Arjan van de Ven of Intel says that PowerTOP could soon show which applications keep the disk busy." Linux.com and Slashdot are both part of OSTG.
Related Stories
[+]
Intel Releases Several Projects to Help Save Power 83 comments
GeekyBodhi writes "LessWatts.org is Intel's new website that hosts several power saving tools. As Linux.com reports, it also shares tips and tricks to help optimize power consumption on hardware from portable devices running on batteries to large data centers. 'LessWatts.org is not about marketing, trying to sell you something or comparing one vendor to another. LessWatts.org is about how you can save real watts, however you use Linux on your computer or computers.' As reported on Slashdot earlier, this isn't the first time Intel has tried to help Linux users cut their power bills. In May, the company launched the PowerTOP program that monitors individual processes to keep track of power consumption. The project comes at a time when more vendors are pre-installing Linux on handhelds and laptops." Linux.com and Slashdot are both owned by SourceForge.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Linux does not consume power! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
PowerTOP not for casual users (Score:3, Insightful)
For the average user it is a nightmare.
Re: (Score:2)
Projects like "folding@home" for PS3 which can add $200-400 a year to your electric bill.
Consumers should be made aware of that, before donating their 'free computing time'. Its not free.
Re: (Score:2)
If people aren't aware that making an electronic device do work uses more electricity, it's their issue. I, for one, am tired of people putting the blame on others for not knowing the blatantly obvious.
$200-400 per year?!? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Quick caluclation: PS3= ca 200W. 2.5 kWh/day, ca 850 kWh/ year. con be everything from 50-300$, depending on your local energy costs.
Yeah, that'd pretty much double it for me (Score:2)
Even though I do use AC (although sparingly). My heat comes from the radiators, and hot water comes from our apartment complex. (I.e., it's included in the rent.) Also, my stove/oven uses gas. Just throwing all of that out there since I seem to have generated a little bit of skepticism with my original claims.
Would anyone not notice (other than rich people with mansions, etc.) an increase of 2.5 kWh/day? Even if you use 10x the electricity that I do, that'd be a 10% increase.
Re: (Score:2)
The PS3 is reported to run 220W when running folding@home.
In, for example, New York, the average residential cost of power in 2006 was 16.86 cents: (http://www.ppinys.org/reports/jtf/electricprices. html)
So 220W or 0.22kW x
New York is on the high side for the US, but not remotely the highest. And prices in Europe tend to be considerably higher.
Additionally, the rate tends tend to be ti
Wow, convincing numbers (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think it is.
but I agree that it would be nice to know up front how much you're actually "donating" to them.
That's the crux of it. $200-400 is not a trivial amount of money. And personally, even though I think folding@home is a good cause I think if I'm going to 'donate' that much money, I can think of other causes I think are more worthy... and I'll get a tax receipt too.
OTOH, if you don't notice an extra 158 kWh on your power bill, then perhaps you're not reall
Dominion Virginia Power (Score:2)
It's not a bug, it's a feature (tm) ! (Score:4, Funny)
Sorry but you're mistaken.
You actually discovered our latest feature.
You haven't read about it yet, because we were developing and testing it until very recently, and we didn't want to speak to early about it.
We, as developers conscious of their travelling users, that have so much time that they need to work as they are in the train, have though of YOU !
As such we present you our latest feature :
WE GIVE YOU THE POSSIBILITY TO COOK YOUR DINNER ON YOUR LAPTOP (so you can do even more important things during the time you're commuting, which will leave you more free time when you reach your destination !)
Alternatively, you can also use our application on your laptop as AN INCREDIBLE AND COMPACT LAP-WARMER !!! For all those long commute during winter.
(DISCLAIMER : Warning, do not use with Batteries manufactured by Sony).
Thank you, wish you enjoy our brand new features.
- The Dev team.
Parent
Second screen shot uses more power (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Laptops??? What about my server farm? (Score:4, Interesting)
My guess is where this kind of thing would make a dollars/cents difference is in the NOC. But this kind of detail isn't very sexy or very high on most NOC operators radar.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It could mean as much as an hour or two, depending. The less the CPU sleeps, the more power it consumes. The more the HDD gets accessed, the more power it consumes. ACPI doesn't buy you much if your CPU is constantly running at full clock and your HDD is always spinning.
How about hours? (Score:5, Informative)
Success Stories [linuxpowertop.org]
Guess you could accuse him of bias...
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Getting 7 hours of battery life is indeed impressive.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you even know what ACPI is? Have you read the link? (clearly not)
No matter how well your "acpi config" is done, if you've a process eating 100% of the cpu power all the time, your batteries will last less than a compuer with no ACPI that it's doing nothing.
IOW, even when your "acpi config" is good, you can save a lot of power. Not minutes, but e
Re: (Score:2)
1. It's not so much acpi, but cpu frequency scaling I should have mentioned. Sorry, wrong terminology.
2. My point is that the unsexy work of sophisticated uses of frequency scaling would probably help more on a laptop. I'm estimating the most power consumption is the lcd panel followed by the cpu which is where the frequency scaling helps.
3. I run a bunch of servers and a storage array and it would be great if the disks would run at lower power
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Our FreeBSD servers auto-throttle their CPU speeds down when idle. The average runtime on our monitored UPS has gone from 60 to 75 minutes. Even if electricity were free, and even if air conditioners were free, and even if we didn't care about wasting energy for no good reason, that still means we have 15 more minutes to get the genera
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The biggest and easiest power savings come from CPU frequency scaling (if your processor supports it). Linux has long done a good pretty good job of putting the CPU to sleep and low power states when it can.
For older Athlon/Duron processors installing/running athcool makes a significant difference in power consumption (as long as it runs stable on
Awesome power saving. Read the article! (Score:2)
Wow. That's really cool. I love how open source allows you to tweak your settings down to the core like this - and Intel is the company that made it.
My results (Score:5, Interesting)
But yes, the application is very interesting. Sorry, Intel, my laptop has an AMD processor. The next one will be Intel, with an Intel graphics card and an Intel wireless card. I promise.
arts patch (Score:3, Interesting)
Just waiting to see... (Score:2, Funny)
According to this utility ... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Even RHEL and Debian stable, which make up a huge chunk of enterprise server linux in the USA use 2.6 kernels.
Re:Old Kernels (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All I've had to do on the last 4 laptops I've tried was to just run the Ubuntu installer/livecd.
Try running a distro that's not from the dark ages. Even Debian seems to fit this description.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For instance, I bought a machine based on the nvidia 6150 embedded graphics card. It was an absolute nightmare with incomatible, buggy ACPI, the network only worked after a warm boot, sound was horribly distorted with a background whine and sleep only worked once.
That nightmare lasted about three months. By then the kernel developers (with not even a bug report from me) had fixed absolutely
Re: (Score:2)
BUT - on a desktop, or laptop? Nuh-uh. I'm kinda greedy about functionality and performance in those cases.
Re: (Score:2)
No idea if earlier versions of NBU work on 2.6, but v6 is old enough now that it can be considered stable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Old Kernels (Score:5, Funny)
Slackware users don't know people. Stop lying! It's just yourself who runs 2.4, right?
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
That's like me saying, "Most people I know run OS/2 and BeOS, so this doesn't help."
Sure it could be true, but so what? I just have a skewed sample and it just means I hang out with weirdos (well.. I do but they don't run OS/2 or BeOS, well.. they don't currently run them).
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Sure, but I was thinking more like "I went with NO_HZ and then apparently the initialization code for my controller freaked out and ate my RAID-set" type problems, not "The SSH daemon didn't start."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't mind a bit of excitement, now and then.
Re:How stable is CONFIG_NO_HZ? (Score:5, Informative)
I gave the powertop thing a try the other day. Seems the worst offender on my machine is MPD, even when it's not doing anything.
Parent
Re:Useless (Score:5, Insightful)
Can they fix the application? Yes. See the list of numerous patches to various "notorious" offenders.
Before you comment about patches being too difficult to apply - in nearly all cases those patches have been sent upstream and are being integrated into the app by the developers of that app. The end result is that while in the short term, PowerTOP benefits only power users who can patch and compile from source, it has enabled identification of offending sections of application code so that the application authors can fix it. (For example, the next release of Pidgin will come with numerous fixes for behavior found with PowerTOP.)
In short:
PowerTOP has almost no benefit for the "normal" user in the short term
PowerTOP has quite a lot of potential benefit for the "power" user
PowerTOP has the ability to enable application developers to make optimizations that help the "normal" users some time down the line (depending on application/distribution release cycles), thus PowerTOP has great benefit for "normal" users in the long term.
Can they stop the application? Usually not, but there are some notorious offenders that are "on by default" that most users don't benefit too much from, and would rather temporarily or permanently disable to increase battery life. (See Beagle for example).
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
A couple of very small changes to themes [revis.co.uk] can cut CPU use from 30% to 1% (with pic).
Based on that kind of thing it wouldn't surprise me if real gains were possible in battery life - at the very least for applications with user generated modifications and plugins. The more unpopular Firefox plugins are certainly notorious for lack of QA.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)