From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Malte Thoma Subject: Re: More than one battery Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 08:32:16 +0100 Sender: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Message-ID: <3E226B80.20208@muenster.de> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Errors-To: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: To: danielk-L9gzEf+okJWVc3sceRu5cw@public.gmane.org, acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Daniel Thor Kristjansson wrote: >I found the text below through some googling. The important thing is >that ospmd is supposed to support acpi policies in the next version. I >believe this means that you can hand a policy to ospmd and have it >handle throttling for you, I doubt it would take cpu load into account. >But I'm going to try to find who's working on that, the cpp files all >just say "Intel" then find out if they are planning on putting a more >complete policy support into the ospmd deamon, or could use a >contribution. Throttling just based on thermal event might save your >CPU, but won't save as much battery power as throttling the CPU when >load is low. (I can easly half my battery draw by throttling and turning >down the LCD, but I wouldn't do it without my hacked heatload >unthrottling when the system load goes up.) > > Please send my a diff from the hacked heatload. If I understand you right, you have included an 'auto-throttling-when-no-load' I think this is worth to be included in the offical release, don't you? We should include 'auto-performance-when-no-load' as welll, what's your opinion? Greetings, Malte >Anyway, I'll keep you informed. > >-- Daniel > > http://216.239.37.100/search?q=cache:pOZPEz5rV_8C:www.intel.com/technology/iapc/acpi/downloads/CHANGES.txt+ospmd+cpu+throttling&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 > >The processor driver (acpi_processor.c) now fully supports ACPI >2.0-based processor performance control (e.g. Intel(R) SpeedStep(TM) >technology) Note that older laptops that only have the Intel "applet" >interface are not supported through this. The 'limit' and 'performance' >interface (/proc) are fully functional. [Note that basic policy for >controlling performance state transitions will be included in the next >version of ospmd.] The idle handler was modified to more aggressively >use C2, and PIIX4 errata handling underwent a >complete overhaul (big thanks to Dominik Brodowski). > >. > > > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com