On Mon, 17 Mar 2008, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Baldwin writes:
Hmm, I actually consider this a feature when I'm not running powerd to use
less battery. I think we should only bump up the CPU on battery power when
using powerd so that it can be lowered again to save battery power when the
CPU is idle.
We have cpufreq enabled by default now, badly configured machines run at 50%
of rated CPU power because people don't know that they need to enable
powerd(8) on servers.
This is only going to get worse when more EnergyStar compliant servers hit
the channel.
I think setting full speed is the correct choice, if people care about
powersaving, they need to configured it, if they don't they should get their
moneys worth out of their hardware.
If cpufreq is going to be enabled by default, should we be enabling powerd by
default, or at least having a powerd_enable="AUTO" that detects the
appropriate frobs and feedback sources and turns on powerd if it's going to be
useful? There might be a reasonable argument to be made that in two of the
three computing environments of choice for FreeBSD (notebooks, servers in
colos), power management is a basic assumption and we should turn on the
necessary bits to deal with it.
Robert N M Watson
Computer Laboratory
University of Cambridge
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
