[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E2B8C35.7030304@mit.edu>
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 23:06:29 -0400
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@....EDU>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>
CC: cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, davej@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, borislav.petkov@....com,
mark.langsdorf@....com, andreas.herrmann3@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/7] acpi-cpufreq: Add support for disabling dynamic
overclocking
On 07/18/2011 12:37 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> One feature present in powernow-k8 that isn't present in acpi-cpufreq is
> support for enabling or disabling AMD's core performance boost technology.
> This patch adds that support to acpi-cpufreq, but also extends it to allow
> Intel's dynamic acceleration to be disabled via the same interface. The
> sysfs entry retains the cpb name for compatibility purposes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Garrett<mjg@...hat.com>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c | 191 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 191 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
How is this different from setting 3400000 vs 3401000 as the max freq?
(I'm probably missing something about the way that Intel's turbo mode
works.)
> +static ssize_t store_cpb(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, const char *buf,
> + size_t count)
> +{
> + int ret = -EINVAL;
> + unsigned long val = 0;
> +
> + ret = strict_strtoul(buf, 10,&val);
> + if (!ret&& (val == 0 || val == 1)&& cpb_supported)
> + cpb_toggle(val);
Shouldn't this set the flag only on policy->cpu (as opposed to all
online cpus?)
Also, you're missing a space before &&.
--Andy
--
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