Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?

Pavel Machek
2006-08-27T15:41:52Z

Hi!

> > The other alternative as suggested earlier this week would be archictures
> > getting to 'opt out' of powerop for their cpufreq drivers where it doesn't
> > necessarily bring anything but the layer of indirection.
> >
> > I'm about to disappear for two weeks for a much needed vacation, but
> > I'll be interested to see other folks comments/opinions on this
> > when I get back.
>
> This week I got some really good feedback and suggestions
> from Mark Gross on the kernel interface and usability and
> I have two new additions for this patch set. So I spend the week
> working on a well thought out kernel interface.
>
> 1) I believe I now have the right kernel interface for a common
> power management infrastructure.
>
> The new kernel interface still uses /sys/power/state to both
> show the current operating point and set a desired operating
> point, by name. There is a new /sys/power/operating_points directory
> that shows all the operating points the system supports. An
> exampled from my centrino laptop shows:
>
> /sys/power/operating_points/high
> /sys/power/operating_points/highest
> /sys/power/operating_points/low
> /sys/power/operating_points/lowest
> /sys/power/operating_points/medium
> /sys/power/operating_points/mem
> /sys/power/operating_points/standby

What makes you think that mixing operating and sleep states is good
idea?

And '600MHz' makes lot more sense than 'lowest' on centrino.

> /sys/power/operating_points/high/frequency
> /sys/power/operating_points/high/voltage
> /sys/power/operating_points/high/latency

What is voltage for 'mem'?

> I've finally had a bit of time to get the sysfs one file - one
> value system in place for OpPoint.
>
> 2) The really good news is there is a now a power manager for
> OpPoint now,
> both in rpm and src rpm form. And since the new power manager runs off
> the new kernel interface and actually does what the cpuspeed daemon does
> I think the kernel interface is sound.
>
> I took the cpuspeed power manager daemon, version 1.2.1, and modified
> it Friday to use the oppoint interface. It supports all the
> options the cpuspeed daemon does, (and can actually still be compiled to
> be the original cpuspeed daemon) it just uses the interface
> described above instead of the cpufreq interfaces.

Congratulations, you now have inferior version of cpufreq ondemand
governor.
Pavel
--
Thanks for all the (sleeping) penguins.