From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarod Wilson Subject: Re: Celeron 220 Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:11:03 -0400 Message-ID: <4810BF27.6040001@redhat.com> References: <480FA81A.1060308@dtech.sk> <1209030828.1784.673.camel@queen.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1209030828.1784.673.camel@queen.suse.de> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: cpufreq-bounces@lists.linux.org.uk Errors-To: cpufreq-bounces+glkc-cpufreq=m.gmane.org+glkc-cpufreq=m.gmane.org@lists.linux.org.uk To: cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk Thomas Renninger wrote: > On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 23:20 +0200, Ing. Michal Zahor wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Celeron 220 in MoBo D201GLY2 said: >> p4-clockmod: Unknown p4-clockmod-capable CPU. Please send an e-mail to >> >> >> Is it possible to use any clockmod ? > > Can the p4-clockmod driver be finally removed? +1 > AFAIK it's doing exactly the same as throttling. > I can remember it interfered with throttling > through /proc/acpi/processor/*/throttling and made the machine very slow > if both got used. > > The throttling interface got enhanced recently and is the one to go for. > > There were hundreds of confusing p4-clockmod reports now on the cpufreq > list... and since a distribution (guessing) is trying to load it by > default the amount of these reports seem to increase recently. DaveJ shut it off in the Fedora kernels a while ago now, and only a few people have even noticed, and most understood that it was for the best... -- Jarod Wilson jwilson@redhat.com