Re: Status of X86_P4_CLOCKMOD?

From: Adrian Bunk
Date: Sat Feb 25 2006 - 07:51:42 EST


On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 05:27:01AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Saturday 25 February 2006 02:57, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 23, 2006, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 08:59:37PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > > And if the option is mostly useless, what is it good for?
> > >
> > > It's sometimes useful in cases where the target CPU doesn't have any better
> > > option (Speedstep/Powernow). The big misconception is that it
> > > somehow saves power & increases battery life. Not so.
> > > All it does is 'not do work so often'. The upside of this is
> > > that in some situations, we generate less heat this way.
> >
> > Doesn't less heat imply less power consumption?
>
> Not in this case no.
>...

Sorry for the dumb question, but how could this work physically?

If a computer produces less heat with the same power consumption, what
happens with the other energy?

> -Andi

cu
Adrian

--

"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/