https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58761 Benoit Pradelle <b.pradelle@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |b.pradelle@xxxxxxxxx --- Comment #14 from Benoit Pradelle <b.pradelle@xxxxxxxxx> 2013-05-30 16:51:31 --- I totally agree with Jean-Philippe: some information is lost with the 3.9 version and this information *is* useful to correctly set CPU frequencies. So either the related_cpus field meaning should be restored or a new field should be added. If you doubt that such information is valuable, please consider all the runtime DVFS controllers such as beta adaptive [1], or CPU MISER [2]. Those systems, to be ported on current multicore processors, have to take a great care of the actually applied CPU frequency (not only that requested per core but the one actually in use). If it is impossible to determine what cores share the same frequency, it is impossible to perform such kind of DVFS on multicore CPUs in a portable way. If you think that related_cpus is misleading (and I'd totally agree with you on that), then maybe a new field is required. [1] C.-h. Hsu and W.-c. Feng, “A power-aware run-time system for high-performance computing,” in Proceedings of the 2005 ACM/IEEE conference on Supercomputing. [2] R. Ge, X. Feng, W. chun Feng, and K. Cameron, “CPU MISER: A performance-directed, run-time system for power-aware clusters,” in Parallel Processing, 2007. ICPP 2007. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.-- 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
