Replies: 2 comments 2 replies
-
That raises some intersting discussion points, therefore moved to discussions |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Nice to see that it is apparently quite easy to implement a more accurate sleep. The question that naturally arises for me:
All of our reporters work by adding timestamps so even if they report instantaneous valeous the timespan is then respected and the calculations for power*time are made over a wider window. In the case of RAPL it is even the case that the subsystem reports energy in the first place. So the question is: what are we really gaining from removing the time jitter? However something else caught my eye: Using I would definitely vouch for a testing script that checks:
Open for feedback :) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
In https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.15985 the authors argue that a
sleep
based solution is suboptimal:When looking at the graph there seems to be some drift in measurements.
We use sleep in
green-metrics-tool/metric_providers/cpu/energy/rapl/msr/component/source.c
Line 446 in 7a0d9ea
We should change this to a
timerfd
timer to be more accurate.This is quite low priority as we only allow sleeps in the ms scale so things should be fine.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions