[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: kernel module options for cpufreq
- From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59 srcf ucam org>
- To: Development discussions related to Fedora <fedora-devel-list redhat com>
- Cc: fedora-kernel-list <fedora-kernel-list redhat com>
- Subject: Re: kernel module options for cpufreq
- Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:20:43 +0100
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 09:10:28AM +0200, Adam Tkac wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 05:13:24PM +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > * remove CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_POWERSAVE -- ondemand automatically
> > throttles down to lowest, and is just a hardcoded state
>
> I don't think removal of powersave governor is good idea. Generally
> ondemand governor does great job but in some cases doesn't. For
> example when I play some films in mplayer ondemand sets frequency to
> max which is not needed, of course.
The same can be achieved by altering
/sys/devices/system/cpu/*/cpufreq/scaling_max_freq, but it's still
likely that you're consuming less power when ondemand is setting your
frequency to max. An idle fast processor consumes less power than an
active slow one.
> Powersave governor is also good in case that you have bad fan in your
> laptop and you are going to compile some big source. Without powersave
> it is not possible (yes, it really happens :) )
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/6/16/100
> I think we should preserve ondemand and powersave governors (and
> potentialy others as Dave Jones wrote in this thread). Please don't
> drop them in favour of your project which might be generally better but
> I believe there are cases where current governors are better.
I'm open to indications as to what these are :) Powersave is
semantically identical to ondemand with scaling_max_freq altered.
Performance is semantically identical to ondemand with scaling_min_freq
altered.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59 srcf ucam org
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]