sobota 3. prosince 2011

Tip: power management settings for Radeon

From kernel 2.6.35 and up Radeon driver supports power management (PM). The default behavior is performance oriented, thus if you want to save some power you will need to tune the defaults. You can select from two PM methods: dynpm and profile. The dynpm method dynamically change the GPU clocks according to GPU load. With this method you have enough performance when needed and power savings when in idle. But this method can cause flickering during reclocking and doesn't support multi heads. To activate this method use:
# echo dynpm > /sys/class/drm/card0/device/power_method
With profile method you can select from several profiles: default, auto, low, mid and high. Default settings is the default profile. It uses default clocks and doesn't change power states. The low, mid, high profiles change the GPU clocks accordingly. The auto profile switches automatically between high and mid depending whether the system is running on AC or battery. It also switches to low when the monitors are in dpms off. Not all cards supports all profiles. For example to activate the auto profile, use:
# echo profile > /sys/class/drm/card0/device/power_method
# echo auto > /sys/class/drm/card0/device/power_profile
More details can be found on http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature.

We also added experimental support for this to tuned. We activate the power savings in desktop and laptop profiles. The code is currently in tuned git.

pátek 25. listopadu 2011

Fedora 16: Firefox power consumption comparison



Fedora 16 has been released so I decided to test it with my Firefox test script to find out what's the power consumption in typical real world "web browsing" scenarios.

Test description

I used the same iMacros script as in previous Firefox power consumption test. I only had to do some syntax changes, because iMacros API changed little bit since the last test.


Hardware

Tests run on HP Proliant DL360 G6 with default BIOS settings / no tunings. For measurements, I used Chroma 66202 the ENERGY STAR/IEC 62301 compliant power meter. The total energy consumed on AC side was monitored. As data logger / power meter controller another machine was used to not influence the machine under test.

Software

Latest available kernels and SW builds as available during the test day were used for Fedora 16.

Table 1: Used softwareare
SystemKernel / SW buildFirefoxFlash
Fedora 152.6.38.8-355.0Beta 2 11.0.d1.98
Fedora 163.1.1-27.0.111.1.102.55

Results


For comparison with Fedora 15 I've used the results measured in the previous test.

In the tables with results, there are power consumption, energy and sample standard deviations (marked stdev) for both values.

Active idle

For this test, Firefox has been running with about:blank for 30 minutes. 

Table 2: Idle state
SystemPavg [W]Pavg stdevEavg [Wh]Eavg stdev
Fedora 1555.96130.038127.97440.019
Fedora 1656.11190.050028.04970.025

There is no big difference when comparing Fedora 16 and Fedora 15 in idle state. Fedora 15 needs little bit less energy, but this is probably an error caused by several peaks during Fedora 16 measurement.


iMacros script with HTML5 Youtube videos

For this test, iMacros test was used as described above and Youtube was configured to use HTML5 video playback.


Table 3: iMacros with HTML5 Youtube
System
Pavg [W]
Pavg stdevEavg [Wh]Eavg stdev
Fedora 1565.68240.133132.83380.0665
Fedora 1665.47780.159932.73160.0799

Fedora 16 needs little bit less energy when Flash is disabled and HTML5 is used for Youtube videos playback.


iMacros script with Flash Youtube videos

This test is the same as previous one, but Firefox flash plugin was activated and Youtube was configured to use Flash for videos playback. This also activates Flash adverts on other pages.
 

Table 4: iMacros with Flash Youtube
System
Pavg [W]
Pavg stdevEavg [Wh]Eavg stdev
Fedora 1568.95750.261734.47110.1308
Fedora 1671.24040.083735.61220.0418

Big surprise is that new version of Flash or Firefox in Fedora 16 caused significant increase of power consumption. Fedora 16 with Flash needed almost 1.5 W more than Fedora 15.

Flash power consumption


This table shows difference between Table 4 and Table 3 which demonstrates saved energy when not using Flash.

Table 5: Flash power consumption
System
Pavg [W]
Eavg [Wh]
Fedora 153.27511.6373
Fedora 165.76262.8806

We can see the Flash power consumption increase here.

Conclusion

As the previous test showed, browsing web with Flash enabled consumes more energy. This is especially true in Fedora 16 with the Flash/Firefox version we tested. There's no big difference between Fedora 15 and Fedora 16 when browsing web without Flash.

úterý 18. října 2011

Deeper C states and increased latency



Today it is common to describe processor power consumption and thermal management state by CX, states where X can be number 0 to n (n depends on the CPU type). In the C0 state the CPU is running. In C-states higher than 0 the CPU is stopped (sleeps). Higher C states means more power savings but also longer delay when returning to C0 (higher latency). ACPI specification describes C0 - C3, but recent CPUs mostly supports more C states. With several BIOSes, higher C states are mapped through C3. The mapping can be done dynamically according to operational conditions (e.g. for some laptops when running on battery the C6 is mapped, when running on AC the C4 is mapped). Overview of the most known C-states can be found in the Table 1 (non-complete compilation of [1-4]).

C-stateNameDescription
C0Operating stateCPU is fully turned on and executing instructions. It can be in one of P-states (P0 - Pn) which defines operational voltage and frequency.
C1HaltCPU main internal clocks are stopped. Bus interface unit and APIC are kept running at full speed.
C1EEnhanced HaltCPU main internal clocks are stopped and the CPU voltage is reduced. Bus interface unit and APIC are kept running. The frequency can be also reduced.
C2Stop ClockCPU internal and external clocks are stopped via hardware.
C3Deep SleepCPU internal and external clocks are stopped, L1/L2 cache can be flushed.
C4Deeper SleepCPU voltage is reduced.
C5Enhanced Deeper SleepCPU voltage is reduced even more and the memory cache is turned off.
C6Deep Power DownCore states are saved into memory with low power consumption. It can reduce the CPU internal voltage to any value, including 0 V.
C7Deeper Power Down *1Same as C6 + flush of L3 cache.

As mentioned earlier higher C states means not only less power consumption, but also higher latency. That's why several BIOSes uses different mapping for AC / battery. Simple experiment will proof the above claims.

Comparison of latency for AC / battery mode

At first we let the Lenovo T500 idling on AC. After while we got the following powertop output:
Cn                Avg residency       P-states (frequencies)
C0 (cpu running)        ( 0,8%)       Turbo Mode     2,7%
polling           0,0ms ( 0,0%)         2,81 Ghz     0,0%
C1 mwait          0,0ms ( 0,0%)         2,14 Ghz     0,0%
C2 mwait          0,3ms ( 0,3%)         1,60 Ghz     0,2%
C4 mwait          6,6ms (98,9%)          800 Mhz    97,2%
As you can see the CPU is most of the time in C4. We can check the latency reported by kernel with the following command:
# cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpuidle/state3/latency
57
This means 57 microseconds (C4 is currently mapped to state3 - the last state in the cpuidle subdir). Then we ping the T500 through LAN from another machine and we got: 401 (31) us. It is average of 10 runs. The standard deviation of the sample is written in the braces.

Next we performed the same experiment with the T500 running on battery. We got the following powertop output:
Cn                Avg residency       P-states (frequencies)
C0 (cpu running)        ( 0.1%)       Turbo Mode     0.9%
polling           0.0ms ( 0.0%)         2.81 Ghz     0.0%
C1 mwait          0.1ms ( 0.0%)         2.14 Ghz     0.0%
C2 mwait          0.7ms ( 0.1%)         1.60 Ghz     0.0%
C6 mwait         58.9ms (99.8%)          800 Mhz    99.1%

Wakeups-from-idle per second : 18.8     interval: 15.0s
Power usage (ACPI estimate): 12.5W (5.3 hours)
As you can see, the CPU is now most of the time in the C6, thus the CPU power consumption can be reduced near to zero. For the latency:
# cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpuidle/state3/latency
162
It means 162 microseconds (C6 is currently mapped to state3). The ping result: 493 (33) us. That is increase about 100 us.

The intel_idle driver

The problem with the latency can be even worse if the intel_idle driver [5] is utilized. This driver has been included since kernel version 2.6.35. It is native hardware driver for the latest Intel CPUs. It supersedes acpi_idle on supported processors (currently Intel Atom, Intel Core i3/i5/i7, associated Intel Xeons). The intel_idle knows more than ACPI and it can bypass the firmware / BIOS settings and the processor can then enter deeper power savings states more aggressively. By default the intel_idle driver is built into the Fedora kernel and is activated automatically on boot (on supported CPUs). This result in higher power savings by default but also higher latency.

If the increased latency is unacceptable, it is possible to specify the max allowed C state by the kernel command line parameter intel_idle.max_cstate, e.g. to use only C0, boot with the intel_idle.max_cstate=0.

The PM QoS kernel interface

For finer runtime control the PM QoS interface [6] can be utilized. Through this interface every process can register it's latency requirement and the cpuidle driver will not transition to deeper C states if the lowest request wouldn't be satisfied. The request is written as four-bytes signed integer to /dev/cpu_dma_latency. The request is valid till the file descriptor is held open. E.g. to request the latency to be lower than 100 us the following commands can be used:
# exec 3>/dev/cpu_dma_latency
# echo -ne '\0144\000\000\000' >&3
For the echo command the 100 (decimal) was translated into 0144 (octal). Let's repeat our experiment:
Cn                Avg residency       P-states (frequencies)
C0 (cpu running)        ( 0.2%)       Turbo Mode     0.1%
polling           0.0ms ( 0.0%)         2.81 Ghz     0.0%
C1 mwait          0.1ms ( 0.2%)         2.14 Ghz     1.3%
C2 mwait         39.7ms (99.6%)         1.60 Ghz     0.0%
C6 mwait          0.0ms ( 0.0%)          800 Mhz    97.3%

Wakeups-from-idle per second : 50.5     interval: 20.0s
Power usage (ACPI estimate): 14.9W (4.3 hours)
As you can see the CPU is now not transitioning to C6. As the side effect the power consumption increased about 2.5 W (by ACPI estimation) and the ping result is a bit better: 301 (30) us.

When the lower latency is not needed, we can remove the requirement from the kernel by closing the file descriptor:
# exec 3>&-
Let's try to set the required latency to 0, the powertop results:
Cn                Avg residency       P-states (frequencies)
C0 (cpu running)        ( 0.2%)       Turbo Mode     0.0%
polling          26.4ms (99.8%)         2.81 Ghz     0.0%
C1 mwait          0.0ms ( 0.0%)         2.14 Ghz     0.0%
C2 mwait          0.0ms ( 0.0%)         1.60 Ghz     0.0%
C6 mwait          0.0ms ( 0.0%)          800 Mhz    99.9%

Wakeups-from-idle per second : 37.8     interval: 15.0s
Power usage (ACPI estimate): 16.9W (3.9 hours) (long term: 15.7W,/4.2h)
Note the increased power consumption and that the cpufreq wasn't affected, i.e. the CPU is running at it's lowest speed. The ping result: 195 (34) us.

User control of PM QoS

The PM QoS interface is also proxied by upower daemon, thus it is possible to control the PM QoS settings through dbus interface (org.freedesktop.UPower.QoS).

The support was also recently added into tuned latency-performance profile (currently only in upstream git [7], but it will be probably part of the future v0.2.22 release). To test it:
# tuned-adm profile latency-performance
The powertop results:
Cn                Avg residency       P-states (frequencies)
C0 (cpu running)        ( 0.4%)       Turbo Mode   100.0%
polling          74.3ms (99.6%)         2.81 Ghz     0.0%
C1 mwait          0.0ms ( 0.0%)         2.14 Ghz     0.0%
C2 mwait          0.0ms ( 0.0%)         1.60 Ghz     0.0%
C6 mwait          0.0ms ( 0.0%)          800 Mhz     0.0%

Wakeups-from-idle per second : 13.4     interval: 5.0s
Power usage (ACPI estimate): 31.4W (2.1 hours)
Note that the power consumption nearly doubles and the CPU is running most of the time in Turbo mode. The ping results: 176 (32) us. Thus we got the lowest latency, but our setup is far from being power efficient.


*1 Deduced, no official name found in Intel specs.
[1] http://www.acpi.info/spec.htm
[2] http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/611
[3] http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/xeon/xeon-e3-1200-family-vol-1-datasheet.html
[4] http://www.lesswatts.org/documentation/silicon-power-mgmnt/
[5] http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=2671717265ae6e720a9ba5f13fbec3a718983b65
[6] http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git;a=blob_plain;f=Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.txt;hb=HEAD
[7] http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=tuned.git;a=commit;h=31639fdec76b294fd67c78ec332fe26bf0ad7bb9

čtvrtek 6. října 2011

F16 power management test day - results

Thanks to all who attended the F16 Power Management Test Day, the feedback was really great. If you missed the event you can still post your results. Stats (till 2011-10-06) follows:

Overall stats

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 stats

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

Measurement stats

Please note the following results 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 (i.e. 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

Bugzilla stats

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

středa 28. září 2011

F16 power management test day will start this Thursday (2011-09-29)

Fedora 16 power management test day will start this Thursday (2011-09-29). The event will be mainly focused on laptops, but even desktop machines can be tested. Everybody is welcome to attend this event and your attendance will help us to make the PM in Fedora better. Special LiveCD was prepared for this event, thus it is really easy to attend. There were created several test cases. Going through all test cases take less an hour. Just visit the PM test day WWW page http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-09-29_PowerManagement and follow the on-site instructions. If you find test cases you are not interested in (or if you don't have time to test it all), just test what you want and report the results, your feedback will be still valuable to us.

Power management guide for F15 was published

Power management guide for F15 went through doc team for language corrections and is finally available online: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/15/html/Power_Management_Guide/index.html. Let's focus on F16 :).

středa 14. září 2011

Power consumption comparison of Firefox browser on various platforms



Since I have more time during the summer, I have finally decided to do Firefox web browser power consumption comparison on various platforms. The goal was to compare power consumption in typical real world "browsing" scenarios.

Test description

I have created simple test script using iMacros Firefox addon to automatize browsing in 3 tabs, the following scenarios were implemented:
  1. Youtube.com videos playback + scrolling Youtube page.
  2. Novinky.cz articles reading (simulated by scrolling the page).
  3. Google.com searching (search term typing simulation, scrolling the page, opening the result).
Every measurement lasted for 30 minutes and every test was measured three times and average values were counted. Before each test the system was left for 10 hours in idle to stabilize. Five 64 bit systems have been tested: Fedora 15, RHEL5, RHEL6, Windows 7, Windows Server 2008 R2. Latest SW updates were applied and default setting and no tunings (i.e. the Balanced power saver profile on Windows) were used. The following tests were performed:
  1. Active idle state with running Firefox with about:blank page.
  2. Scenario 1 with HTML5 Youtube videos playback and scenarios 2 and 3 in parallel.
  3. Scenario 1 with Flash Youfube videos playback and scenarios 2 and 3 in parallel.
Hardware

Tests run on HP Proliant DL360 G6 with default BIOS settings / no tunings. For measurements, I used Chroma 66202 the ENERGY STAR/IEC 62301 compliant power meter. The total energy consumed on AC side was monitored. As data logger / power meter controller another machine was used not to influence the machine under test.

Software

Latest available kernels and SW builds as available during the test day were used. I've used binary versions of Firefox from Mozilla website, except RHEL5, where Firefox had to be compiled (Firefox 5.0 binary version does not support RHEL5). Firefox version 5 and latest Flash (Beta 2 11.0.d1.98) was used.

Table 1: Used softwareare
SystemKernel / SW build
Fedora 152.6.38.8-35
RHEL52.6.18-274
RHEL62.6.32-174
Windows 76.1.7601
Windows Server 2008 R26.1.7601
 
Idle state
 

For this test, Firefox has been running with about:blank for 30 minutes.

Table 2: Idle state
System
Pavg [W]
Eavg [Wh]
Fedora 1555.961327.9744
RHEL562.172131.0791
RHEL656.081028.0343
Windows 759.558329.7725
Windows Server 2008 R259.0285029.5077

From Table 2 you can see that all Linux distributions except RHEL5 has more or less the same power consumption on our testing platform. Increased power consumption in RHEL5 is probably mostly caused by older kernel (e.g. no tickless kernel). Windows in idle state needs more energy than Linux systems on our testing platform.


iMacros script with HTML5 Youtube videos

For this test, iMacros test was used as described above and Youtube was configured to use HTML5 video playback. RHEL5 couldn't participate in this test, because of insufficient dependencies.

Table 3: iMacros with HTML5 Youtube
System
Pavg [W]
Eavg [Wh]
Fedora 1565.682432.8338
RHEL665.912732.9490
Windows Server 2008 R265.174332.5799
Windows 765.814632.9000

There are no big differences in power consumption between measured systems on our testing platform. Interesting fact is that Windows systems had the same power consumption as Linux based ones although Windows systems needed more power in idle state.

iMacros script with Flash Youtube videos

This test is the same as previous one, but Firefox flash plugin was activated and Youtube was configured to use Flash for videos playback. This also activates Flash adverts on other pages.

Table 4: iMacros with Flash Youtube
System
Pavg [W]
Eavg [Wh]
Fedora 1568.957534.4711
RHEL571.680535.8323
RHEL670.454035.2192
Windows Server 2008 R265.858232.9218
Windows 768.246034.1154

Surprise here was Windows 2008 R2 Server in comparison with Windows 7. Power consumption on Windows 2008 R2 Server with Flash was almost the same as with HTML5.

Flash power consumption

This table shows difference between Table 4 and Table 3 which demonstrates saved energy when not using Flash.

Table 5: Flash power consumption
System
Pavg [W]
Eavg [Wh]
Fedora 153.27511.6373
RHEL64.54132.2702
Windows Server 2008 R20.68390.3419
Windows 72.43141.2154

Conclusion

Windows has bigger power consumption in idle state than Linux based systems on our testing platform. There are no big differences between Windows and Linux when browsing web without Flash, but Windows needs less energy when Flash is used. If you need Flash only for services which supports also HTML5, you should definitely use HTML5 to save energy.

čtvrtek 4. srpna 2011

Comparison of HDD/SDD on Dell Latitude D620 running RHEL-6



Recently I got into my hands Kingston SSDnow V+ series 128GB SNVP325-S2/128GB and Dell Latitude D620 laptop that was equipped with Hitachi HTS721010G9SA00 HDD. So I prepared simple power consumption related comparison.

I measured time and energy that was consumed for various tasks. All tasks were run three times and average values were counted. From the time and energy the average power consumption of the whole system was calculated. I measured HDD for various settings of accoustic management, R/W multiple sector transfer, and advanced power management level. On SSD most of these settings were not available and it only supported subset of advanced power management levels. I used Chroma 66202 ENERGY STAR/IEC 62301 compliant power meter (http://www.chromaate.com/product/detail.aspx?id=1593). Between measurements the I/O cache was flushed. During the measurement display dimming, screensaver and cron were disabled.

In the table 1 there are results for RHEL-6 Kickstart provision, cold boot, kernel sources unpack (3 times in a row with cache flush), mock targeted kernel rebuild and 1 hour active idle test. In the table the results for HDD and SSD are compared with help of colours - green colour stands for better results and red colour for worse results.

Table 1: Power consumption of HDD/SSD for various tasks.
Task HDD SSD
t
[s]
Pavg
[W]
E
[Wh]
t
[s]
Pavg
[W]
E
[Wh]
Kickstart provision 854.00 41.20 9.774 754.00 39.83 8.342
Boot 50.00 38.34 0.533 40.00 37.38 0.415
Kernel 2.6.32 unpack (3 times) 76.39 39.00 0.828 65.83 38.31 0.701
Mock build kernel-2.6.32-79 8689.25 42.78 103.257 8083.51 41.21 92.534
Active idle for 1 hour Advanced power management level: 128 3600.00 21.05 21.050 3600.00 19.32 19.320
Advanced power management level: 255 3600.00 21.20 21.200 - - -
Advanced power management level: 1 3600.00 20.94 20.940 3600.00 19.32 19.320

From the table 1 it is apparent that for all measured tasks the SSD was better. Not only all tasks were finished in less time but also less energy was consumed.

In the table 2 there are results for sequential read test. For this test the hdparm -t command was used. In this test the average read and peak read speeds in MB/s from the three runs were observed.

Table 2: Power consumption/performance of HDD/SSD during sequential read.
Task HDD SSD
t
[s]
Pavg
[W]
E
[Wh]
Average
read
[MB/s]
Peak
read
[MB/s]
t
[s]
Pavg
[W]
E
[Wh]
Average
read
[MB/s]
Peak
read
[MB/s]
Sequential read (hdparm -t) Acoustic management: 254
Advanced power management level: 128
R/W multiple sector transfer: 8
18.53 26.00 0.134 39.17 43.06 18.31 21.23 0.108 115.90 115.97
Acoustic management: 254
Advanced power management level: 254
R/W multiple sector transfer: 16
18.34 25.39 0.129 48.23 48.26

From the table 2 it is apparent that the SSD was again better in all observed parameters.

In the table 3 there are results for random seek test. For this test the seeker utility was used. During this test the average seek time in ms was observed. Also the maximal acoustic noise level in dBA was measured during this test. The acoustic noise level numbers are only informal, because uncalibrated equipment was used. The measurement was done remotely in the office during night. The background noise level was measured to be about 30 dBA there.

Table 3: Power consumption/performance of HDD/SSD during random seeks.
Task HDD SSD
t
[s]
Pavg
[W]
E
[Wh]
Acoustic
noise max
[dBA]
Average
seek
[ms]
t
[s]
Pavg
[W]
E
[Wh]
Acoustic
noise max
[dBA]
Average
seek
[ms]
Random seek Acoustic management: 254
Advanced power management level: 128
R/W multiple sector transfer: 8
30.31 27.88 0.235 40 15.43 30.02 22.82 0.190 30 0.25
Acoustic management: 254
Advanced power management level: 254
R/W multiple sector transfer: 16
30.33 28.05 0.236 40 15.82
Acoustic management: 128
Advanced power management level: 128
R/W multiple sector transfer: 8
29.34 27.89 0.227 37 16.62

In the table 3 you can see that the SSD was again better in all observed parameters.

The SSD was better in all tests, but it is worth to note that it was quite a new SSD and really old laptop with old HDD. In case the up-to-date and higher class HDD would be available these results wouldn't be probably such single-valued. Also the empty SSD was used in the test thus the internal wear levelling algorithms were not probably in effect and was not able to negatively affect the results as it would do during long term real life usage.

F16 power management test day early notice

Fedora 16 power management test day is planned to be be hold on 2011-09-29. This event will concentrate on testing how well various common power management operations work on range of systems. As this test day aims to test out existing functionality on a range of hardware, it's vital that we get as many testers as possible so we can find as many bugs as possible. Some of the test cases will be targeted to laptops, but everybody can attend and selectively run test cases that fits her/his need or HW capabilities. Every result will be highly welcome and will help us to make the power management in Fedora even better.

Power management guide for F15

Fedora power management guide was updated to reflect all new features of F15. Currently the updated draft is available on: http://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/doc/power-management-guide/ and it has been also sent to 'docs guys' for corrections. Hopefully it will be published soon on: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/.

Welcome

Welcome to Fedora/RHEL power management blog. We will present here power consumption measurement/benchmarking, announcements, news and tips related to power management in Fedora/RHEL. Stay tuned, more will come.