Le mercredi 5 juillet 2006 18:13, Holger Macht a écrit : > > Original, but why not after. It's original to have a fine grained control > > like this. > > I really don't understand what you are trying to say here ;-) Was it a > question or a statement? :-)
Yeah, missed a few words. It was more a statement. My point was more: I don't really see a use for such a fine grained control right now, but I'm not necessarily against such a feature. Btw, if you could provide a few use cases for this one you would make me happy. ;-) > With the ondemand governor this setting is set through > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ondemand/ignore_nice_load . The > userspace implementation evaluates also the CPU nice load when calculation > the CPU load. > > It specifies whether niced processes can cause a CPU frequency increment > although they don't really need that much CPU power and thus wouldn't jump > over the UP_THRESHOLD where frequencies are usually increased. > > It's a policy decision. On AC power for example, you also want to conisder > niced processes because if the CPU frequency is switched up more > frequently isn't that problematic. In the other case, On battery, you want > a more passive frequency policy and thus you don't consider niced > processes. Ok, thanks for the insight. > > I think one method is missing, I would expect a method to list the > > available CPU governors. > > Yes, this could be added or this information could be exported on a > device. Great! Regards. -- Kévin 'ervin' Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net "Ni le maître sans disciple, Ni le disciple sans maître, Ne font reculer l'ignorance."
pgpQXH6UGPIuM.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ powersave-devel mailing list [email protected] http://forge.novell.com/mailman/listinfo/powersave-devel
