From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dominik Brodowski Subject: Re: [PATCH] 3/3 Dynamic cpufreq governor and updates to ACPI P-state driver Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 20:22:16 +0200 Sender: cpufreq-bounces@www.linux.org.uk Message-ID: <20031024182216.GB28421@brodo.de> References: <88056F38E9E48644A0F562A38C64FB60077914@scsmsx403.sc.intel.com> <1066725533.5237.3.camel@laptop.fenrus.com> <20031021095925.GB893@inferi.kami.home> <20031021101737.GA31352@wiggy.net> <20031021105234.GF893@inferi.kami.home> <20031021203215.GE26971@brodo.de> <20031023143242.GH643@openzaurus.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031023143242.GH643@openzaurus.ucw.cz> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: cpufreq-bounces@www.linux.org.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Pavel Machek Cc: danielk@mrl.nyu.edu, Mattia Dongili , cpufreq@www.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 04:32:43PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > Yes indeed. She wants to set a cpufreq policy which suits of her needs: > > it consists of a > > - minimum frequency => not too low [she's plugged in] > > I just hope minimum frequency is not going to be > honoured in case of overheat. > > Issue is what happens if user specifies range containing no > valid frequency. Kernel currently uses next _higher_ > frequency, but going for next lower one seems to be > important (burning cpus, exploding batteries, ...) Yes, that's one bug my acpi patchset addresses. Dominik