Re: [RFC] [PATCH] cpufreq: allow full selection of default governors
From: Dave Jones
Date: Tue Apr 24 2007 - 20:04:25 EST
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 03:05:36PM -0700, Nish Aravamudan wrote:
> On 4/24/07, Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 09:03:23PM +0000, William Heimbigner wrote:
> > > The following patches should allow selection of conservative, powersave, and
> > > ondemand in the kernel configuration.
> > This has been rejected several times already.
> > Ondemand and conservative isn't a viable governor for all cpufreq
> > implementations (ie, ones with high switching latencies).
> This piques my curiosity -- some governors don't work with some
> cpufreq implementations. Are those implementations in the kernel or in
> userspace? If in the kernel, then perhaps there should be some
> dependency expressed there in Kconfig between cpufreq implementation
> and the available governors
it can't be solved that easily. powernow-k8 for example is fine to
use with ondemand on newer systems, where the latency is low.
On older models however, it isn't.
> > Also, see the
> > comment in the Kconfig a few lines above where you are adding this.
> Are these governors unfixable? If
tbh, I've forgotten the original issues that caused the comment
to be placed there. Dominik ?
> Just looking for more info -- feel free to just point me at the archives.
cpufreq-list archives are at http://lists.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cpufreq
(though only available to list members)
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/