I got the following response from Intel. It's a little confused,
perhaps. Or, maybe if you have ACPI turned on properly, perhaps
the kernel can read the latency from the processor itself.
Anyhow, he says that the latency is 10 - 100 microseconds for Intel
processors.Since the values of
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 01:49:17AM +0100, Greg Kochanski wrote:
I got the following response from Intel. It's a little confused,
perhaps. Or, maybe if you have ACPI turned on properly, perhaps
the kernel can read the latency from the processor itself.
Yes, it's a bit confusing/confused.
this is the p4_clockmod code:
policy-cpuinfo.transition_latency = 100; /* assumed */
it's expressed in nS so it's 1mS.
And by the way this is a comment in cpufreq_ondemand.c that may
enlighten some more:
/*
* The polling frequency of this governor depends on the capability of
*
Package: linux-image-2.6.20-1-686
Version: 2.6.20-3
Severity: minor
File: cpufreq_ondemand
Cpufreq_ondemand takes too long to respond to a load increase.
Currently, one cannot set
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ondemand/sampling_rate_min
to anything smaller than 50 (0.5 second).
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 09:36:27AM +0100, Greg Kochanski wrote:
...
Suggestions:
1) allow sampling_rate_min to be set to smaller values, like 0.1 second.
The default sampling_rate_min should probably be 0.25 seconds.
If that were the case, the CPU would power up before
a
Mattia Dongili wrote:
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 09:36:27AM +0100, Greg Kochanski wrote:
...
Suggestions:
1) allow sampling_rate_min to be set to smaller values, like 0.1 second.
The default sampling_rate_min should probably be 0.25 seconds.
If that were the case, the CPU would power
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 03:44:30PM +0100, Greg Kochanski wrote:
Mattia Dongili wrote:
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 09:36:27AM +0100, Greg Kochanski wrote:
...
Suggestions:
1) allow sampling_rate_min to be set to smaller values, like 0.1 second.
The default sampling_rate_min should probably
7 matches
Mail list logo
