Pentium 4m kernel 2.4.21

Pentium 4m kernel 2.4.21

[Martin Klinkigt (multimedia-test)]

Hello,
I has a Pentium 4 m and the 2.4.21 Kernel with cpufreq-2.4.21-2. 
Now I can change the frequency in each case between 1,2 and 1,6 Ghz.
Under Windows I had it however already on 400 MHz.

Can I change it somehow that he is further as 1.2 Ghz down?  

Thanks
Martin

Re: Pentium 4m kernel 2.4.21

[Viktor Radnai]

Hi Martin,

I've managed to clock down my 2GHz Pentium 4m to around 150MHz by doing 
the following:

- compile both speedstep and p4-clockmod as modules
- modprobe speedstep
- set the governor to powersave
- rmmod speedstep
- modprobe p4-clockmod
- set the CPU speed

Hope this helps,

Vik

Martin Klinkigt (multimedia-test) wrote:
> Hello,
> I has a Pentium 4 m and the 2.4.21 Kernel with cpufreq-2.4.21-2. 
> Now I can change the frequency in each case between 1,2 and 1,6 Ghz.
> Under Windows I had it however already on 400 MHz.
> 
> Can I change it somehow that he is further as 1.2 Ghz down?  
> 
> Thanks
> Martin
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Cpufreq mailing list
> Cpufreq@www.linux.org.uk
> http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cpufreq
> 
> 

Feature request (was: Pentium 4m kernel 2.4.21)

[Viktor Radnai]

Hi all,

I wonder if it would be possible to modify the cpufreq driver modules so
that more than one could be loaded at the same time (speedstep-ich and
p4-clockmod are good examples). Perhaps change the location of the
cpufreq virtual files from /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ to
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/<modulename>/ ?

Cheers,
Vik

Viktor Radnai wrote:
> Hi Martin,
> 
> I've managed to clock down my 2GHz Pentium 4m to around 150MHz by doing 
> the following:
> 
> - compile both speedstep and p4-clockmod as modules
> - modprobe speedstep
> - set the governor to powersave
> - rmmod speedstep
> - modprobe p4-clockmod
> - set the CPU speed
> 
> Hope this helps,
> 
> Vik
> 
> Martin Klinkigt (multimedia-test) wrote:
> 
>> Hello,
>> I has a Pentium 4 m and the 2.4.21 Kernel with cpufreq-2.4.21-2. Now I 
>> can change the frequency in each case between 1,2 and 1,6 Ghz.
>> Under Windows I had it however already on 400 MHz.
>>
>> Can I change it somehow that he is further as 1.2 Ghz down? 
>> Thanks
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cpufreq mailing list
>> Cpufreq@www.linux.org.uk
>> http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cpufreq
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Cpufreq mailing list
> Cpufreq@www.linux.org.uk
> http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cpufreq
> 
> 

Re: Feature request (was: Pentium 4m kernel 2.4.21)

[Dominik Brodowski]

Oh well, so users want to use 150 MHz instead of 1600 MHz now...
In fact, I have some ideas to allow same-time usage of a 
	throttling
and a
	frequency and voltage scaling
driver. But IMHO NOT for 2.4. and NOT for 2.6. It's something which might be
worthy of discussion for 2.7.

	Dominik

On Sat, Aug 23, 2003 at 08:50:03PM +1000, Viktor Radnai wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I wonder if it would be possible to modify the cpufreq driver modules so
> that more than one could be loaded at the same time (speedstep-ich and
> p4-clockmod are good examples). Perhaps change the location of the
> cpufreq virtual files from /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ to
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/<modulename>/ ?
> 
> Cheers,
> Vik
> 
> Viktor Radnai wrote:
> >Hi Martin,
> >
> >I've managed to clock down my 2GHz Pentium 4m to around 150MHz by doing 
> >the following:
> >
> >- compile both speedstep and p4-clockmod as modules
> >- modprobe speedstep
> >- set the governor to powersave
> >- rmmod speedstep
> >- modprobe p4-clockmod
> >- set the CPU speed
> >
> >Hope this helps,
> >
> >Vik
> >
> >Martin Klinkigt (multimedia-test) wrote:
> >
> >>Hello,
> >>I has a Pentium 4 m and the 2.4.21 Kernel with cpufreq-2.4.21-2. Now I 
> >>can change the frequency in each case between 1,2 and 1,6 Ghz.
> >>Under Windows I had it however already on 400 MHz.
> >>
> >>Can I change it somehow that he is further as 1.2 Ghz down? 
> >>Thanks
> >>Martin

Re: Feature request

[Viktor Radnai]

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 ;)

> In fact, I have some ideas to allow same-time usage of a 
> 	throttling
> and a
> 	frequency and voltage scaling
> driver. But IMHO NOT for 2.4. and NOT for 2.6. It's something which might be
> 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.

Cheers,
Vik

> On Sat, Aug 23, 2003 at 08:50:03PM +1000, Viktor Radnai wrote:
> 
>>Hi all,
>>
>>I wonder if it would be possible to modify the cpufreq driver modules so
>>that more than one could be loaded at the same time (speedstep-ich and
>>p4-clockmod are good examples). Perhaps change the location of the
>>cpufreq virtual files from /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ to
>>/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/<modulename>/ ?
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Vik
>>
>>Viktor Radnai wrote:
>>
>>>Hi Martin,
>>>
>>>I've managed to clock down my 2GHz Pentium 4m to around 150MHz by doing 
>>>the following:
>>>
>>>- compile both speedstep and p4-clockmod as modules
>>>- modprobe speedstep
>>>- set the governor to powersave
>>>- rmmod speedstep
>>>- modprobe p4-clockmod
>>>- set the CPU speed
>>>
>>>Hope this helps,
>>>
>>>Vik
>>>
>>>Martin Klinkigt (multimedia-test) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>I has a Pentium 4 m and the 2.4.21 Kernel with cpufreq-2.4.21-2. Now I 
>>>>can change the frequency in each case between 1,2 and 1,6 Ghz.
>>>>Under Windows I had it however already on 400 MHz.
>>>>
>>>>Can I change it somehow that he is further as 1.2 Ghz down? 
>>>>Thanks
>>>>Martin
> 
> 
> 

Re: Feature request

[Dominik Brodowski]

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

Re: Feature request

[Daniel Thor Kristjansson]

My laptop has C2 and ACPI throttling still saves and additional 500mW +
manages to cool the CPU enough to get the fan turned off.

Cpufreq cools the cpu more, but I've yet to get a kernel to run with
both cpufreq + tcp/ip4 so I'm stuck with ACPI throttling for now.

-- Daniel
  << When truth is outlawed; only outlaws will tell the truth. >> - RLiegh

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Dominik Brodowski wrote:

]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
]
]_______________________________________________
]Cpufreq mailing list
]Cpufreq@www.linux.org.uk
]http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cpufreq
]

Re: Feature request (was: Pentium 4m kernel 2.4.21)

[Jan Rychter]

>>>>> "Dominik" == Dominik Brodowski <linux@brodo.de> writes:
 Dominik> Oh well, so users want to use 150 MHz instead of 1600 MHz
 Dominik> now...  
[...]

FWIW, nowadays computers are way too fast and powerful. And eat too much
battery power. My 750MHz Pentium-IIIM is speedstepped down most of the
time. And I'm really happy with the performance of my Zaurus SL-C760,
which has an Intel XScale PXA255 (400MHz).

If people who write software actually think about performance (not
wasting oodles of cycles on GUI animations), then we already have all
the speed we need...

--J.