Re: [PATCH 1/2] 2.6: use scaling_available_freqs in acpi-cpufreq-ioport driver

[Bruno Ducrot <ducrot-kk6yZipjEM5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>]

On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 07:03:25PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> 
> As long as people don't want to change rvo, irt, etc, we should be
> fine.

Yes, probably, but in case of powernow-k7 I need to pass specifically
fsb and latency.  And I much prefer to do it atomic.  Also I want to
check that the user do not enter stupid things.  For example, I
requested that frequency being passed even though it's actually only
here in order to check that frequency and FID being OK with something
like
if (frequency != table[vid] * fsb * ...) then fail.
for each entry passed.

> First step in that direction would be to have voltage in milivolts in
> those frequency tables, so that core can print them etc... like this:
> 
> --- clean/include/linux/cpufreq.h	2004-01-09 20:24:26.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux/include/linux/cpufreq.h	2004-03-01 19:02:48.000000000 +0100
> @@ -316,6 +316,7 @@
>  	unsigned int	index;     /* any */
>  	unsigned int	frequency; /* kHz - doesn't need to be in ascending
>  				    * order */
> +	unsigned int	voltage;   /* mV */
>  };

Well, why not?

-- 
Bruno Ducrot

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


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now.
Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with
a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click