From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Georg Sauthoff Subject: Re: Pentium M and 2.4. kernel: does not work Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 21:57:26 +0200 Sender: cpufreq-admin@www.linux.org.uk Message-ID: <200308162157.26732.g_sauthoff@web.de> References: <200308160043.30649.g_sauthoff@web.de> <200308161028.50976.g_sauthoff@web.de> <20030816185320.GA833@brodo.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20030816185320.GA833@brodo.de> Content-Disposition: inline Errors-To: cpufreq-admin@www.linux.org.uk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To: cpufreq@www.linux.org.uk On Saturday 16 August 2003 20:53, Dominik Brodowski wrote: > On Sat, Aug 16, 2003 at 10:28:50AM +0200, Georg Sauthoff wrote: > > > So, > > > # echo -n "0%0%100%userspace" > /proc/cpufreq > > > > ^^^^^^^^ What does this mean? > > set the CPU 0 0% > to something between > 0% > and 100% > and let the userspace > governor decide which speed to use in between. It's much easier with the > 2.6. sysfs interface -- one of the reasons I'm not really too excited abo= ut > the cpufreq backport for 2.4. [besides, I _only_ use 2.[56] kernels...] Well, I tested a last 2.5er and it worked very stable with my hardware, and= =20 the interface for cpufreq was easy to use (ok - the Pentium M support was n= ot=20 so far at this time I think). So everything just fine, but the =A7"!*$^ Cis= co=20 VPN at the university needs a =A7$=3D?)"# closed source cisco kernel module= ... Ok, the 2.5er has IPsec support included, but I didn't find so much=20 documentation about it (specially how to configure the userspace programs).= =20 And btw it seems that an encrypted group passward of a vpn-gateway doesn't= =20 make it easier to use other client software instead of the buggy cisco=20 client. > > > first, then you can use the > > > /proc/sys/cpu/0/speed > > > file to set the CPU speed manually. > > > > Hm, unfortunetly after I set the userspace governor (like above) the > > /proc/sys/cpu/0/s* gives me 0 again ... > > > > In the kernel logs I don't see any messages from cpufreq. Ok, after a > > very quick look at the patch sources I don't see printk's there, too. > > Probably a BUG I introduced in the latest backport. Hopefully I'll have > the time tomorrow to update it. In the meantime: what does /proc/cpufreq > tell? It does tell (AFAIRC): min-policy max-policy ... (sorry don't remember the end of the line) I will mail the exact line tommorow. Regards Georg Sauthoff