public inbox for linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
To: Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>
Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, cpufreq@vger.kernel.org,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi-cpufreq: remove unreliable get-frequency functions
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 00:07:46 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1106062353030.4784@x980> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110606071209.GA20080@isilmar-3.linta.de>

> Why can't it be fixed in silicon for future chips?
> May there be workarounds possible in the CPU microcode?

Not going to happen.

> The APERF MSR is not a real
> alternative to a real "get current frequency" function (which I have
> wished to be added to the ACPI spec for how long? must be close to 10
> years...): APERF only allows you to get an average frequency, and not the
> current frequency at the time of the call.

Instantaneous frequency can change many times per second.
What benefit is there to reporting someting that changes that fast
to readers of sysfs?

> For silicon which can't be fixed any more, using APERF instead may be a
> valid  -- but costly[*] -- solution. For other CPUs, I'd favour keeping
> the current code -- even if Intel CPUs aren't capable to reliably tell
> which frequency they're running at.

APERF is expensive how?

ondemand, which does care about average frequency,
has been using APERF for years.

> Finally:
> 
> > +	policy->cur = data->freq_table[data->acpi_data->state].frequency;
> 
> How do you know what state / frequency the CPU is running here?

really the correct fix is for the upper level of cpufreq to
simply no export this value at all, or to export the value
that was last written.  A driver should be free to decline
to supply any current value.

thanks,
Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center


  reply	other threads:[~2011-06-07  4:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-06-06  5:47 [PATCH] acpi-cpufreq: remove unreliable get-frequency functions Len Brown
2011-06-06  7:12 ` Dominik Brodowski
2011-06-07  4:07   ` Len Brown [this message]
2011-06-07  5:42     ` Dominik Brodowski
2011-06-07  6:01       ` Dominik Brodowski
2011-07-14  1:53       ` Len Brown
2011-07-16 22:49         ` [PATCH, RESEND] acpi-cpufreq: remove unreliable optional device.get() code Len Brown
2011-07-17 14:59           ` Dominik Brodowski
2011-07-21  9:48           ` Thomas Renninger

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.2.02.1106062353030.4784@x980 \
    --to=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=cpufreq@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@dominikbrodowski.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox