From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Jones Subject: Re: 2.6.17 -> 2.6.18 regression: cpufreq broken since 2.6.18-rc1 on pentium4 Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 15:01:33 -0400 Message-ID: <20060730190133.GD18757@redhat.com> References: <20060730120844.GA18293@outpost.ds9a.nl> <20060730160738.GB13377@irc.pl> <20060730165137.GA26511@outpost.ds9a.nl> <44CCF556.2060505@linux.intel.com> <20060730184443.GA30067@outpost.ds9a.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060730184443.GA30067@outpost.ds9a.nl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: bert hubert , Alexey Starikovskiy , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zwane@arm.linux.org.uk, venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com, tony@atomide.com, akpm@osdl.org, cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk, len.brown@intel.com On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 08:44:43PM +0200, bert hubert wrote: > > Do you have any info in /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq ? > > No, not with just acpi-cpufreq loaded. With the help of Zwane, I've > discovered that if I unload acpi-cpufreq, I *can* load p4-clockmod, and then > the directory you mention appears, and I can configure governors, and life > is good. This all on 2.6.18-rc3. Right, cpufreq drivers aren't 'stackable'. > Do I understand correctly that acpi-cpufreq is supposed to offer comparable > features? If the BIOS supports the relevant ACPI tables. > Perhaps acpi-cpufreq *has* loaded, but did not find the proper hooks, but > has now registered itself, thus blocking p4-clockmod? When everything is > in-kernel, acpi-cpufreq might register itself first, which would lead to the > same thing. Normally, if the necessary BIOS bits aren't there, then acpi-cpufreq will fail to register. For some reason it sounds like it believes that everything went ok. I wonder if something changed in acpi recently that caused this change in behaviour ? Len ? Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk