On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 14:15:46 -0700 "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com> wrote:Good point. But we can't just jump there and be done with it. That state might not be available (then again, we could require the user to put in a valid max_hwcstate, but that isn't as user friendly). Indeed. But the current system doesn't easily allows us to handle that. Any ideas? It is still way better going to C3 less than possible than not at all (i.e. the previous workaround of processor.max_cstate). As far as I can tell from the documentation, every C-state includes all of the negative side effects of the ones preceding it. So it should just be a matter of sub-optimal selection by the governor. And I don't see how we can fix that without a big table for each processor and possibly chipset. Rgds -- -- Pierre Ossman Linux kernel, MMC maintainer http://www.kernel.org PulseAudio, core developer http://pulseaudio.org rdesktop, core developer http://www.rdesktop.org --
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 001/196] Chinese: Add the known_regression URI to the HOWTO |
| Linus Torvalds | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Andrew Morton | 2.6.25-mm1 |
| Vladislav Bolkhovitin | Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
git: | |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 0/37] dccp: Feature negotiation - last call for comments |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
