From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: static freq table support for Pentium M Dothan Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:45:06 -0700 Sender: cpufreq-bounces@www.linux.org.uk Message-ID: <1092869106.3133.1.camel@localhost> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: cpufreq-bounces+glkc-cpufreq=gmane.org@www.linux.org.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Michael Clark Cc: michael@mage.metaparadigm.com, cpufreq list On Tue, 2004-08-17 at 10:51 +0800, Michael Clark wrote: > Having all of the voltages in the code (VID#A through VID#D) is really > more for the purposes of completeness. The VID#A voltages after some > thought are the most conservative setting (also same as seen in the ACPI > tables of my Thinkpad), as the max voltage of the Dothans is 1.6, having > the higher voltage will allow for greater power supply tolerance. I was considering this approach, but I got concerned because the voltage ranges of VID#A and VID#D don't overlap - so by using VID#A voltages on a #D CPU, you'd be driving it out of spec. J