Re: [REGRESSION] [CPUFREQ] 3.9.0-rcX

[Dirk Brandewie <dirk.brandewie@gmail.com>]

On 03/24/2013 07:53 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Sunday, March 24, 2013 07:59:35 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> On 24 March 2013 19:41, Maciej Rutecki <maciej.rutecki@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> (long e-mail, sorry ;-))
>>
>> Don't be, it was useful :)
>>
>>> Last known good: 3.8.0
>>>
>>> Short description:
>>> 1. On -rc3, after s2ram cpufreq does not set CPU on max frequency on high
>>> load (on battery).
>>
>> Try attached patch for this.
>>
>>> 2. On -rc4 (this is not real regression because I change config between -rc3
>>> and rc4), "ondemand" does not work. Current frequency is 'strange' (792
>>> MHz).
>>> ===============================================================================
>>> Kernel 3.9.0-rc4
>>>
>>> CASE 7
>>> (normal boot)
>>> cpu0/cpufreq//affected_cpus:0
>>> cpu0/cpufreq//related_cpus:0
>>
>> This must be related to your different driver.
>
> Yes, intel_pstate is not really a cpufreq driver.  It just overtakes the
> whole subsystem.
>
> Dirk, can you please check if this is as intended?

This is working as intended.  The intel_pstate driver has the governor
integrated into the scaling driver and does not use external governors.

The reason the frequency is strange is because intel_pstate returns a
measured value of the effective frequency that the core ran at during
the last time it was sampled.

--Dirk