Re: Feature request

[Dominik Brodowski <linux@brodo.de>]

On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 03:16:34AM +1000, Viktor Radnai wrote:
> Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> >Oh well, so users want to use 150 MHz instead of 1600 MHz now...
> My laptop is still quite responsive at 150MHz and anything that lets me 
> conserve battery power when the performance isn't needed is worth 
> trying. After all, this is the very purpose of frequency scaling. It 
> doesn't really matter how fast the kernel executes idle loops ;)

Well, does your computer do some real "idling" - e.g. ACPI C-States [C2 and
above] or APM "halt"? If so, then you don't need any throttling - it saves
approximately the same amount of energy.

> >worthy of discussion for 2.7.
> That would be great, too bad that it won't happen sooner. In the 
> meantime, do you think that the method described below is an acceptable 
> way of saving power or do you foresee any potential problems / 
> instability as a result of this?
> 
> If you think that this is a workable method then I might hack one of the 
> userspace frequency scaling utilities to support this method.

As most systems support either ACPI-C-States or APM "halt" and these methods
are as "good" for power saving, I don't see a reason to implement this at
the moment.

	Dominik