From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bruno Ducrot Subject: Re: OnDemand governor vs. work queue Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 11:59:29 +0200 Message-ID: <20050525095929.GD32472@poupinou.org> References: <1116991600.6395.71.camel@gaston> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1116991600.6395.71.camel@gaston> 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@lists.linux.org.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 01:26:40PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > Hi ! > > >From what I've seen, the OnDemand governor works using a timer/workqueue > pair. > > That annoys me a bit as the setup I have on PowerMacs can take several > ms to transition (due to voltage transition mostly). I don't like the > idea of hogging keventd that long. > > Wouldn't it make sense, especially for setups where transition latency > is high (by high, I mean significant compared to HZ for example), to > actually spawn a kthread and do the sampling & switching from there ? I'm wondering if in that case a userspace daemon will be more suited.. -- Bruno Ducrot -- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy? -- Don't know. Don't care.