[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1219341101.9264.4.camel@localhost>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 19:51:41 +0200
From: Martin Filip <bugtraq@...ula.net>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: cpufreq regression, unable to set lower frequency
Hi LKML,
I've upgraded my kernel few days earlier and suddenly my cpufreqd
stopperd working. My configuration is this:
AC adapter connected:
set scaling_max_freq and scaling_min_freq to maximal available
frequency
AC adapter disconnected:
set scaling_max_freq to maximal available, scaling_min_freq to minimal
available.
When I connect AC adapter, everything works fine but when I disconnect
my adapter, everything remains on maximal frequency and in logs I can
see:
cpufreqd: cpufreqd_set_profile: Couldn't set profile "Powersave Low" set
for cpu0
After some tests I've traced problem to
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.25.y.git;a=commitdiff;h=53391fa20cab6df6b476a5a0ad6be653c9de0c46
What do you think? Is this condition correct?
# cd /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/
when AC adapter is connected, something like this should happen:
# cat scaling_available_frequencies
2167000 2000000 1833000 1667000 1500000 1333000 1000000
# echo 2167000 > scaling_max_freq
# echo 2167000 > scaling_min_freq
when disconnected, something like this should:
# echo 1000000 > scaling_max_freq
-su: echo: write error: Invalid argument
# echo 1000000 > scaling_min_freq
after min is set, max can be lowered to. Before this patch, lowering max
below min lead to lowering of min to the same value.
I think that this whole condition must not be here at all. After
removing this condition the kernel behaves like this:
# cat scaling_min_freq scaling_max_freq
2167000
2167000
# echo 1000000 > scaling_max_freq
# cat scaling_min_freq scaling_max_freq
1000000
1000000
# echo 2167000 > scaling_min_freq
# cat scaling_min_freq scaling_max_freq
1000000
1000000
# echo 2167000 > scaling_max_freq
# echo 2167000 > scaling_min_freq
# cat scaling_min_freq scaling_max_freq
2167000
2167000
Which I think is not perfect but is better then current behavior. What
do you think?
--
Martin Filip <bugtraq@...ula.net>
jabber: nexus@...ula.net
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (198 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists