Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: ondemand: Introduces stepped frequencyincrease

[Pavel Machek]

On Wed 2009-07-08 19:41:23, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
> 
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Matthew Garrett<mjg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 03:56:33PM +0200, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
> >> The patch introduces a new sysfs tunable cpufreq/ondemand/freq_step,
> >> as found in conservative governor, to chose the frequency increase step,
> >> expressed as percentage (default = 100 is previous behaviour).
> >>
> >> This allows fine tuning powersaving on mobile CPUs, since smaller steps will allow to:
> >> * absorb punctual load spikes
> >> * stabilize at the needed frequency, without passing for more power consuming states, and
> >
> > Is this a measured powersaving? The ondemand model is based on the
> > assumption that the idle state is disproportionately lower in power than
> > any running state, and therefore it's more sensible to run flat out for
> > short periods of time than run at half speed for longer. Is this
> > inherently flawed, or is it an artifact of differences in your processor
> > design?

Different processors behave differently -- that assumption is wrong at
least for old athlon64s... Those have power-hungry idle states, and 4x
power consumption at 2x frequency....

(Original Intel speedstep was similar iirc).

								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/