Re: [PATCH 2.6.14] cpufreq: don't suggest speedstep-centrino for Dothan-based Celeron-M processors

[Bruno Ducrot <ducrot@poupinou.org>]

On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 06:26:52AM -0800, Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote:
> 
> I think from user perspectibe, P4-clockmod is most confusing driver
> ever. P4-clockmod will only do the duty-cycle based throttling and will
> not save any significant power. In fact, CPU may end up consuming more
> power than without it for a constant amount of unit-work (Dominik has
> patiently explained it quite a few times on this list). It will only
> help in thermal conditions and ACPI throttling driver should handle that
> anyway. Given this: I vote for removing p4-clockmod altogether from
> cpufreq drivers. Dave, Dominik: do you agree?

-1

There is an infrastructure in order to cool the processor with
cpufreq.  Doing what you propose disallow people with such
configurations to use ACPI passive cooling.

I propose instead that we use some sort of flags such
that only cpufreq driver which are able to scale voltages, or
knowns to ofer good power savings, use the policy/governor
stuff.

-- 
Bruno Ducrot

--  Which is worse:  ignorance or apathy?
--  Don't know.  Don't care.