All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* starting governor ondemand failed
@ 2005-04-04 10:42 Ivor Hewitt
  2005-04-04 12:43 ` Dominik Brodowski
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ivor Hewitt @ 2005-04-04 10:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: cpufreq

Hi,
I was trying to have a play with the ondemand governor but I just get 
the following logged when I try to switch to it:-

cpufreq-core: governor switch
cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 2
userspace: managing cpu 0 stopped
cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 1
cpufreq-core: starting governor ondemand failed
cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 1

This is on a PIIIM using the speedstep-smi interface.
The cpu is only capable of switching between two frequencies, would this 
prevent ondemand starting up?

Regards,

-- 
Ivor
http://www.ivor.it

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: starting governor ondemand failed
  2005-04-04 10:42 starting governor ondemand failed Ivor Hewitt
@ 2005-04-04 12:43 ` Dominik Brodowski
  2005-04-04 13:27   ` Ivor Hewitt
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Dominik Brodowski @ 2005-04-04 12:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ivor Hewitt; +Cc: cpufreq

On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 11:42:19AM +0100, Ivor Hewitt wrote:
> Hi,
> I was trying to have a play with the ondemand governor but I just get 
> the following logged when I try to switch to it:-
> 
> cpufreq-core: governor switch
> cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 2
> userspace: managing cpu 0 stopped
> cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 1
> cpufreq-core: starting governor ondemand failed
> cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 1
> 
> This is on a PIIIM using the speedstep-smi interface.
> The cpu is only capable of switching between two frequencies, would this 
> prevent ondemand starting up?

This isn't the problem, but the following: we do not know how long 
transitions using speedstep-smi take, therefore we still need to assume
that it takes very long, thus making it unable to be used for ondemand
frequency switching.

	Dominik

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: starting governor ondemand failed
  2005-04-04 12:43 ` Dominik Brodowski
@ 2005-04-04 13:27   ` Ivor Hewitt
  2005-04-04 13:50     ` Ivor Hewitt
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ivor Hewitt @ 2005-04-04 13:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Dominik Brodowski; +Cc: cpufreq

Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 11:42:19AM +0100, Ivor Hewitt wrote:
> 
>>Hi,
>>I was trying to have a play with the ondemand governor but I just get 
>>the following logged when I try to switch to it:-
>>
>>cpufreq-core: governor switch
>>cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 2
>>userspace: managing cpu 0 stopped
>>cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 1
>>cpufreq-core: starting governor ondemand failed
>>cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 1
>>
>>This is on a PIIIM using the speedstep-smi interface.
>>The cpu is only capable of switching between two frequencies, would this 
>>prevent ondemand starting up?
> 
> This isn't the problem, but the following: we do not know how long 
> transitions using speedstep-smi take, therefore we still need to assume
> that it takes very long, thus making it unable to be used for ondemand
> frequency switching.
> 
Hi,
I'll stick to to cpufreqd then. :-)

Ah I see "CPUFREQ_ETERNAL".

What should be an acceptable transition time? Is it possible for me to 
determine my speedstep-smi transition time and enable the switching?
Or are you saying that there's no way of knowing how long the smi 
transition would take, therefore it has to be disabled?

Many thanks,

-- 
Ivor
http://www.ivor.it

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* RE: starting governor ondemand failed
@ 2005-04-04 13:39 Pallipadi, Venkatesh
  2005-04-04 16:58 ` Bruno Ducrot
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Pallipadi, Venkatesh @ 2005-04-04 13:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ivor Hewitt, Dominik Brodowski; +Cc: cpufreq



Dominik,

Can we do some calibration of the time taken to switch frequencies
at the time of initialization and use it here instead of hardcoding 
it to CPUFREQ_ETERNAL? 

Thanks,
Venki

>-----Original Message-----
>From: cpufreq-bounces@ZenII.linux.org.uk 
>[mailto:cpufreq-bounces@ZenII.linux.org.uk] On Behalf Of Ivor Hewitt
>Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 6:27 AM
>To: Dominik Brodowski
>Cc: cpufreq@ZenII.linux.org.uk
>Subject: Re: starting governor ondemand failed
>
>Dominik Brodowski wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 11:42:19AM +0100, Ivor Hewitt wrote:
>> 
>>>Hi,
>>>I was trying to have a play with the ondemand governor but I 
>just get 
>>>the following logged when I try to switch to it:-
>>>
>>>cpufreq-core: governor switch
>>>cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 2
>>>userspace: managing cpu 0 stopped
>>>cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 1
>>>cpufreq-core: starting governor ondemand failed
>>>cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 1
>>>
>>>This is on a PIIIM using the speedstep-smi interface.
>>>The cpu is only capable of switching between two 
>frequencies, would this 
>>>prevent ondemand starting up?
>> 
>> This isn't the problem, but the following: we do not know how long 
>> transitions using speedstep-smi take, therefore we still 
>need to assume
>> that it takes very long, thus making it unable to be used 
>for ondemand
>> frequency switching.
>> 
>Hi,
>I'll stick to to cpufreqd then. :-)
>
>Ah I see "CPUFREQ_ETERNAL".
>
>What should be an acceptable transition time? Is it possible for me to 
>determine my speedstep-smi transition time and enable the switching?
>Or are you saying that there's no way of knowing how long the smi 
>transition would take, therefore it has to be disabled?
>
>Many thanks,
>
>-- 
>Ivor
>http://www.ivor.it
>
>_______________________________________________
>Cpufreq mailing list
>Cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk
>http://lists.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cpufreq
>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: starting governor ondemand failed
  2005-04-04 13:27   ` Ivor Hewitt
@ 2005-04-04 13:50     ` Ivor Hewitt
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ivor Hewitt @ 2005-04-04 13:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ivor Hewitt; +Cc: cpufreq, Dominik Brodowski

Ivor Hewitt wrote:
> Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 11:42:19AM +0100, Ivor Hewitt wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> I was trying to have a play with the ondemand governor but I just get 
>>> the following logged when I try to switch to it:-
>>>
>>> cpufreq-core: governor switch
>>> cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 2
>>> userspace: managing cpu 0 stopped
>>> cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 1
>>> cpufreq-core: starting governor ondemand failed
>>> cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 1
>>>
>>> This is on a PIIIM using the speedstep-smi interface.
>>> The cpu is only capable of switching between two frequencies, would 
>>> this prevent ondemand starting up?
>>
>>
>> This isn't the problem, but the following: we do not know how long 
>> transitions using speedstep-smi take, therefore we still need to assume
>> that it takes very long, thus making it unable to be used for ondemand
>> frequency switching.
>>
> Hi,
> I'll stick to to cpufreqd then. :-)
> 
> Ah I see "CPUFREQ_ETERNAL".
> 
> What should be an acceptable transition time? Is it possible for me to 
> determine my speedstep-smi transition time and enable the switching?
> Or are you saying that there's no way of knowing how long the smi 
> transition would take, therefore it has to be disabled?
> 
Ok terrible form replying to myself! :-)

Using the magic transition value of 10000 seems to behave nicely; idling 
along nicely, kick off a compile and it turns the dial up to '11'.

Since I only have two frequency choices does the transition time matter 
that much?

Cheers,

-- 
Ivor
http://www.ivor.it

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: starting governor ondemand failed
  2005-04-04 13:39 Pallipadi, Venkatesh
@ 2005-04-04 16:58 ` Bruno Ducrot
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Bruno Ducrot @ 2005-04-04 16:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pallipadi, Venkatesh; +Cc: cpufreq, Dominik Brodowski

On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 06:39:52AM -0700, Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote:
> 
> 
> Dominik,
> 
> Can we do some calibration of the time taken to switch frequencies
> at the time of initialization and use it here instead of hardcoding 
> it to CPUFREQ_ETERNAL? 
> 

What we want is worst case...

-- 
Bruno Ducrot

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-04-04 16:58 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-04-04 10:42 starting governor ondemand failed Ivor Hewitt
2005-04-04 12:43 ` Dominik Brodowski
2005-04-04 13:27   ` Ivor Hewitt
2005-04-04 13:50     ` Ivor Hewitt
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-04-04 13:39 Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2005-04-04 16:58 ` Bruno Ducrot

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.