From: Dominik Brodowski <linux@brodo.de>
To: "Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@intel.com>,
"Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@intel.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: "Mallick, Asit K" <asit.k.mallick@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi <linux-acpi@intel.com>,
cpufreq@www.linux.org.uk, "Pallipadi,
Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 3/3 Dynamic cpufreq governor and updates to ACPI P-state driver
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 20:38:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031024183852.GE28421@brodo.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031023141703.GG643@openzaurus.ucw.cz> <CFF522B18982EA4481D3A3E23B83141C24B4DF@orsmsx407.jf.intel.com> <7F740D512C7C1046AB53446D3720017304B04F@scsmsx402.sc.intel.com>
Vetoed.
cpufreq_dynamic is too generic, there are different approaches == different
governors in the work which are all "dynamic".
Dominik
On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 02:50:06PM -0700, Nakajima, Jun wrote:
> Me too, because it would be consistent with the other ones; i.e. how the
> user perceives them.
On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 01:47:49PM -0700, Moore, Robert wrote:
>
> I would vote for "cpufreq_dynamic"
>
> Bob
On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 04:17:04PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Could you name it cpufreq_demand? We have enough
> TLAs as is.
> Pavwl
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dominik Brodowski <linux@brodo.de>
To: "Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@intel.com>,
"Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@intel.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>,
"Mallick, Asit K" <asit.k.mallick@intel.com>,
linux-acpi <linux-acpi@intel.com>,
cpufreq@www.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 3/3 Dynamic cpufreq governor and updates to ACPI P-state driver
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 20:38:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031024183852.GE28421@brodo.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031023141703.GG643@openzaurus.ucw.cz> <CFF522B18982EA4481D3A3E23B83141C24B4DF@orsmsx407.jf.intel.com> <7F740D512C7C1046AB53446D3720017304B04F@scsmsx402.sc.intel.com>
Vetoed.
cpufreq_dynamic is too generic, there are different approaches == different
governors in the work which are all "dynamic".
Dominik
On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 02:50:06PM -0700, Nakajima, Jun wrote:
> Me too, because it would be consistent with the other ones; i.e. how the
> user perceives them.
On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 01:47:49PM -0700, Moore, Robert wrote:
>
> I would vote for "cpufreq_dynamic"
>
> Bob
On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 04:17:04PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Could you name it cpufreq_demand? We have enough
> TLAs as is.
> Pavwl
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-10-24 18:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-10-21 2:56 [PATCH] 3/3 Dynamic cpufreq governor and updates to ACPI P-state driver Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2003-10-21 2:56 ` Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2003-10-21 8:38 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-10-21 8:38 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-10-21 9:59 ` Mattia Dongili
2003-10-21 9:59 ` Mattia Dongili
2003-10-21 10:17 ` Wichert Akkerman
2003-10-21 10:52 ` Mattia Dongili
2003-10-21 12:59 ` Wichert Akkerman
2003-10-21 15:36 ` Daniel Thor Kristjansson
2003-10-21 20:32 ` Dominik Brodowski
2003-10-21 20:32 ` Dominik Brodowski
2003-10-22 15:48 ` Daniel Thor Kristjansson
2003-10-22 15:48 ` Daniel Thor Kristjansson
2003-10-23 14:32 ` Pavel Machek
2003-10-23 14:32 ` Pavel Machek
2003-10-24 18:22 ` Dominik Brodowski
2003-10-24 18:22 ` Dominik Brodowski
2003-10-21 19:23 ` Carl Thompson
2003-10-21 20:37 ` Dominik Brodowski
2003-10-21 20:37 ` Dominik Brodowski
2003-10-21 20:44 ` Dominik Brodowski
2003-10-21 20:59 ` Dominik Brodowski
2003-10-23 14:17 ` Pavel Machek
2003-10-23 14:17 ` Pavel Machek
2003-10-23 20:47 ` Moore, Robert
2003-10-23 20:47 ` Moore, Robert
2003-10-23 21:50 ` Nakajima, Jun
2003-10-23 21:50 ` Nakajima, Jun
2003-10-24 18:38 ` Dominik Brodowski [this message]
2003-10-24 18:38 ` Dominik Brodowski
2003-10-24 11:27 ` Ducrot Bruno
2003-10-24 11:27 ` Ducrot Bruno
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-10-22 5:50 Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2003-10-24 18:52 Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2003-10-24 18:52 ` Pallipadi, Venkatesh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20031024183852.GE28421@brodo.de \
--to=linux@brodo.de \
--cc=asit.k.mallick@intel.com \
--cc=cpufreq@www.linux.org.uk \
--cc=jun.nakajima@intel.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=robert.moore@intel.com \
--cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.