On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 16:06 +0100, Harald Gustafsson wrote:
quoted text
> 2010/12/17 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>:
> > This is all assuming lowering the frequency is sensible to begin with in
> > the first place... but that's all part of the CPUfreq governor, it needs
> > to find a way to lower energy usage while conforming to the system
> > constraints.
> 
> Yes, I and you have already suggested the safe way to not lower it below
> the total dl bandwidth. But for softer use cases it might be possible to
> e.g. exclude threads with longer periods than cpufreq change periods in the
> minimum frequency.

I was more hinting at the fact that CPUfreq is at best a controversial
approach to power savings. I much prefer the whole race-to-idle
approach, its much simpler.
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/