linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] cpufreq: eeepc 900 frequency scaling driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-id: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0903160020250.30317@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Mon, 16 Mar 2009 00:24:18 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
To:	Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
Cc:	Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>,
	Cristiano Prisciandaro <cristiano.p@...net.ch>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, cpufreq@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] cpufreq: eeepc 900 frequency scaling driver


On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:

> On Tue 2008-12-02 16:15:21, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 07:04:09PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > 
> > > Is this really needed? Could we simply talk to the cpu directly,
> > > without help of ACPI?
> > 
> > No. The ACPI write ends up talking to the embedded controller and some 
> > io ports.
> 
> Oops... I always knew that eee-s are broken by design (reporting
> battery percent as mWh, etc...) but I did not realize how bad it
> is. (ACPI has perfectly standard cpu frequency scaling interface, even
> if it is not used too often these days....)

Huh?

What cpufreq driver is deployed more broadly than acpi-cpufreq?
AFAIK, Linux uses it on nearly every ACPI compliant Intel-based
system that has frequency scaling.

-Len

--
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/