On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:35:32PM -0400, Len Brown wrote: > cpufreq is not designed to manage thermals, and putting p4_clockmod > underneath it to manage thermals is a mistake. Check processor_thermal.c. It explicitly interfaces with cpufreq in order to perform P state management. > There is already a well known thermal throttling interface > available via ACPI and it does not need p4_clockmod to run. > Passive trip points work automatically even without cpufreq being present. > If they do not, then we need to fix them. You're assuming that the throttling interface is always exposed via ACPI. I've seen machines where this isn't the case. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
