* Con Kolivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050802 03:54]: > On Tue, 2 Aug 2005 18:15, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Con Kolivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050802 00:36]: > > > On Tue, 2 Aug 2005 05:17 pm, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > But this you can verify by booting to single user mode and then running > > > > pmstats 5, and if ticks is not below 25HZ, there's something in the > > > > kernel polling. > > > > > > I'm removing modules and they don't seem to do anything so I'm not sure > > > what else to try. > > > > If you have 130HZ in single user mode, it's some kernel driver. > > You could printk the the next timer, then grep for that in System.map: > > I kept pulling modules and eventually got to 27Hz so something was definitely > happening.
Cool. > I need to ask you why you think limiting the maximum Hz is a bad idea? On a > laptop, say we have set the powersave governor, we have already told the > kernel we are interested in maximising power saving at the expense of > performance. Would it not be appropriate for this to be linked in a way that > sets maximum Hz to some value that maximises power save (whatever that value > is) at that time? With dyntick the system will run at max HZ only when busy. It is possible that cutting down max HZ might cause some savings while busy, but I would assume the savings are minimal. I personally prefer to have the performance available when needed, and max savings while idle. Tony - 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/
