On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 09:43:40AM +0200, Corentin Chary wrote: > >> Could it happen that upcoming machines provide this interface (the two ACPI > >> functions) and also can do real CPU frequency/volt switching, e.g. via > >> acpi-cpufreq? > > > > Probably this interface is a solution specific to machines based on the > > celeron M: I don't even know if other 'old' models provide the same > > interface. > > Hi, > We I just received another patch for that (adding a cpufv file in > sysfs) and I don't really know what to do. > > As Grigori Goronzy said, using cpufreq in not a good idea: I'm not sure I agree. It's clear that ondemand and conservative aren't sensible choices with the driver, but beyond that... > > 3) It looks like it is impossible to use more than one cpufreq driver > > per CPU. This effectively means you can either use the regular ACPI > > frequency scaling, which switches between multipliers, or SHE. That's > > unacceptable. SHE is not intended to replace the regular frequency > > scaling, but to complement it. I don't think there's a terribly good reason to use the SHE methods if the CPU supports speedstep. 945 will automatically drop the frontside bus in the deepest P states. I'd be surprised if it gave any real world benefits on the atom based systems. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
