On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 03:05:36PM -0700, Nish Aravamudan wrote: > On 4/24/07, Dave Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 09:03:23PM +0000, William Heimbigner wrote: > > > The following patches should allow selection of conservative, > > powersave, and > > > ondemand in the kernel configuration. > > > > This has been rejected several times already. > > Ondemand and conservative isn't a viable governor for all cpufreq > > implementations (ie, ones with high switching latencies). > > This piques my curiosity -- some governors don't work with some > cpufreq implementations. Are those implementations in the kernel or in > userspace? If in the kernel, then perhaps there should be some > dependency expressed there in Kconfig between cpufreq implementation > and the available governors
it can't be solved that easily. powernow-k8 for example is fine to use with ondemand on newer systems, where the latency is low. On older models however, it isn't. > > Also, see the > > comment in the Kconfig a few lines above where you are adding this. > > Are these governors unfixable? If tbh, I've forgotten the original issues that caused the comment to be placed there. Dominik ? > Just looking for more info -- feel free to just point me at the archives. cpufreq-list archives are at http://lists.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cpufreq (though only available to list members) Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
