On Wednesday 25 August 2010 19:12:08 Auke Kok wrote:
> On 08/25/2010 07:23 AM, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > It would be great to see the first two patches getting applied.
> > Not sure whether the third is worth it, it's an improvement, though.
> > Patches are against latest powertop master branch.
>
> cool, there's certainly something to be said to borrow from
> cpufreqtools.
Great.
If you have ideas or things to be implemented which might fit into
cpufrequtils, it would be great to hear about them.
For example the "get amount of frequencies" func I added in the third
patch would better be put into cpufrequtils.
Another feature I'd like to add there is:
Detect available Turbo/Boost frequency (-ies).
AFAIK AMD has a MSR for that. I've read that there isn't a way for Intel
CPUs to read this info out, but a static table (possibly combined with
some easy algorithm) might be needed?
You might stumble about other things which are worth to be added
there so that other tools can profit from the code as well.
> There's another big cleanup patch pending, I need to look whether #3
> conflicts with that.
Ok. Tell me if and what I should rebase against newer code.
Thanks,
Thomas
_______________________________________________
Power mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.bughost.org/mailman/listinfo/power
