[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a44ae5cd0607280338x674aa92agb49f38a494bf8923@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 12:38:49 +0200
From: "Miles Lane" <miles.lane@...il.com>
To: "Dave Jones" <davej@...hat.com>,
"Patrick McFarland" <diablod3@...il.com>,
"Miles Lane" <miles.lane@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: The ondemand CPUFreq code -- I hope the functionality stays
On 7/28/06, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 09:04:23PM -0400, Patrick McFarland wrote:
>
> > I think you've gotten confused. Ondemand is a horrible governor that only
> > flips between two cpu frequencies, the lowest and the highest.
>
> That isn't true. I just double checked, and saw my core-duo changing
> between all 4 states it offers.
Yep, the ondemand governor switches between all frequencies on my
Pentium 4 M laptop. It's a HP Pavillion dv1240us.
> > Use the Conservative governor instead.
>
> This governor is based on the same code as on-demand with some subtle
> tweaks to make it not change the frequency as often. If anything *this*
> one should be less 'active' for you than ondemand.
I have tried the other governers (albeit a while ago) and found they
didn't manage power anywhere near as well as ondemand. Perhaps
results vary for each governor according to CPU and chipset.
Miles
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists