Re: cpufreq doesn't seem to work in Intel Q9300

[Dominik Brodowski]

Hi,

On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 07:11:28AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> 1) when the cpu is idle (as in "idle loop C states/hlt"; p4_clockmod
> doesn't mean anything.. the clock is stopped not just skipped.
> 2) when the cpu is executing code (eg non-idle), it takes more power
> for a unit of time than it takes when it's idle

This statement might be true, but might also be wrong:
	a) on systems where only C1 is exported, p4-clockmod most often
	   equals the state the CPU is in when in C1[*], so we're in a 
	   win-win, or lose-lose situation.
	b) IIRC 50% throttling is not "execute-one-statement
	   skip-one-statement execute-one-statement, etc." but instead
	   work for N us, skip for N us, work for N us, etc. Therefore,
	   the situation is a bit more compilcated.

Still, I agree that p4-clockmod is useful mostly in corner cases (and for
developing the cpufreq infrastructure in the first case, but that's another
story)

[*] or C2 even?

Best,
	Dominik
--
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/