[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071210170650.0026ad01@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:06:50 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To: Guillaume Chazarain <guichaz@...oo.fr>
Cc: Stefano Brivio <stefano.brivio@...imi.it>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, rjw@...k.pl,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.24-rc4-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.23
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 01:01:25 +0100
Guillaume Chazarain <guichaz@...oo.fr> wrote:
> Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> > the frequency of both cores is the maximum of what linux sets each
> > core to;
>
> Do you mean that the cpufreq code can be confused about the actual
> frequency of the cores?
it means that cpufreq doesn't know the actual frequency (although bios sometimes tells us about the relationship, often the bios just lies through it's teeth); it only knows what it asks for, not what it gets. We know it'll get at least what it asks for, but it can get more than it asks for basically.
>That sounds like a big problem.
it'll get way worse going forward.
(but even on todays systems, the tsc no longer represents frequency, but is some fixed clock totally unrelated to cpu frequency)
--
If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@...ux.intel.com
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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