Power Management Test day (2011-09-29) Stats
 

Hi,

thanks all who attended the Power Management Test day, the feedback was
really great. Stats follows

thanks & regards

Jaroslav

P.S.: If you missed the event you can still post your results at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-29_PowerManagement

---

Power Management Test Day Stats (2011-09-29):

Submitted results: 20
Unique testers: 17
Unique machines: 19
Submitted results with valid measurement data (the test day had two parts -
usual test cases and very simple measurement / benchmark): 15

Test cases available (sum for all testers): 140
Test cases finished (sum for all testers): 127
Test cases not tested (sum for all testers): 13
All testers finished in total 90.71 % of available test cases.

Test cases passed: 100 (e.g. 78.74 % of finished)
Test cases passed with warn: 109 (e.g. 85.83 % of finished)
Test cases failed: 18 (e.g. 14.17 % of finished)
That means better than 85 % success rate if warn is counted as pass.


Please note the following results are are provided here only for
informative purposes. The measurement method used during the
test day was very simple, thus the resulting data are only very rough
estimation.

Power savings for laptop-battery-powersave tuned profile:
Max. reported power savings: 650 mWh
Min. reported power savings: -702 mWh (e.g. not savings)
Average power savings for all machines (stddev in braces): 138.1 (361.9) mWh

Power consumption highlights:
The machine that consumed the most energy: HP Pavilion dv6
Energy consumed after 15 mins in active idle (laptop-battery-powersave
tuned profile): 10368 mWh

The machine that consumed the least energy: EeePC Asus 1000H
Energy consumed after 15 mins in active idle (laptop-battery-powersave
tuned profile): 2057 mWh

Bugs reported or mentioned during the test day: 5
List of bugs:
Bug 637397 - [Pineview] Samsung N150 plus netbook: no brightness control
Bug 719679 - Sometimes, suspend on close-lid may be the best choice for a docked laptop
Bug 742061 - [abrt] kernel: WARNING: at net/mac80211/util.c:540 ieee80211_can_queue_work+0x3b/0x41 [mac80211](): TAINTED ---------W
Bug 742325 - SELinux is preventing /usr/libexec/colord from 'read' accesses on the file mtab.
Bug 742344 - [nouveau] Resume from suspend is broken
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Power Management Test day (2011-09-29) Stats
 

Jaroslav Skarvada wrote:
> thanks all who attended the Power Management Test day, the feedback was
> really great. Stats follows

On the topic of power management:

Is there anything being done to address the regressions[1] in 2.6.38+
kernels?

[1] http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_2638_aspm
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Power Management Test day (2011-09-29) Stats
 

----- Original Message -----
> Jaroslav Skarvada wrote:
> > thanks all who attended the Power Management Test day, the feedback
> > was
> > really great. Stats follows
>
> On the topic of power management:
>
> Is there anything being done to address the regressions[1] in 2.6.38+
> kernels?
>
I cannot reproduce these numbers on our testing machine - in [1] power
consumption in active idle is +- measurement error, in other tests
it is mostly higher power consumption, but also higher performance.
Similar for idle graph in [2]. I will try to get one of the mentioned
machines and recheck. More detailed comparison of power consumption of
various Fedoras is on my todo list

regards

Jaroslav

[1] http://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/pm-tests/
[2] http://pm-blog.yarda.eu/2011/09/power-consumption-comparison-of-firefox.html
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Power Management Test day (2011-09-29) Stats
 

Jaroslav Skarvada wrote:
> I cannot reproduce these numbers on our testing machine - in [1] power
> consumption in active idle is +- measurement error, in other tests
> it is mostly higher power consumption, but also higher performance.
> Similar for idle graph in [2]. I will try to get one of the mentioned
> machines and recheck. More detailed comparison of power consumption of
> various Fedoras is on my todo list

Good to know. I did not see any wild regressions either and I do not
take Phoronix's reviews very seriously, but I was curious.

Thanks.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel