Re: [REGRESSION] [CPUFREQ] 3.9.0-rcX

[Dirk Brandewie]

On 03/24/2013 07:53 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Sunday, March 24, 2013 07:59:35 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 24 March 2013 19:41, Maciej Rutecki <maciej.rutecki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > (long e-mail, sorry ;-))
> >
> > Don't be, it was useful :)
> >
> > > Last known good: 3.8.0
> > >
> > > Short description:
> > > 1. On -rc3, after s2ram cpufreq does not set CPU on max frequency on high
> > > load (on battery).
> >
> > Try attached patch for this.
> >
> > > 2. On -rc4 (this is not real regression because I change config between -rc3
> > > and rc4), "ondemand" does not work. Current frequency is 'strange' (792
> > > MHz).
> > > ===============================================================================
> > > Kernel 3.9.0-rc4
> > >
> > > CASE 7
> > > (normal boot)
> > > cpu0/cpufreq//affected_cpus:0
> > > cpu0/cpufreq//related_cpus:0
> >
> > This must be related to your different driver.
>
> Yes, intel_pstate is not really a cpufreq driver.  It just overtakes the
> whole subsystem.
>
> Dirk, can you please check if this is as intended?

This is working as intended.  The intel_pstate driver has the governor
integrated into the scaling driver and does not use external governors.

The reason the frequency is strange is because intel_pstate returns a
measured value of the effective frequency that the core ran at during
the last time it was sampled.

--Dirk
--
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/