Re: better cpu throttling

2010-07-01 Thread Martin Toft
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 02:32:26PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote: I like this one better. Slow down the poll interval just a little so it's not so hysterical, but also go straight to 100. If you need CPU, you need CPU. It still backs down slowly, but that's just to prevent getting caught in slow

Re: better cpu throttling

2010-07-01 Thread Darrin Chandler
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 07:59:00PM -0600, Tobias Weingartner wrote: On Wednesday, June 30, Darrin Chandler wrote: What you're saying is true, but that's not the only use case. Streaming media may not benefit from 100% cpu but may not be able to work properly at 0%. The same goes for

Re: better cpu throttling

2010-07-01 Thread viq
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 03:34:14PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote: On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Luis Henriques luis.hen...@gmail.com wrote: Probably, a silly question, but here it goes: With this patch, I will not be able to set the perflevel to, say, 50% and keep the system using that

better cpu throttling

2010-06-30 Thread Ted Unangst
I like this one better. Slow down the poll interval just a little so it's not so hysterical, but also go straight to 100. If you need CPU, you need CPU. It still backs down slowly, but that's just to prevent getting caught in slow mode again. It also pays attention to per-core load, much

Re: better cpu throttling

2010-06-30 Thread Mark Kettenis
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 14:32:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Ted Unangst ted.unan...@gmail.com I like this one better. Slow down the poll interval just a little so it's not so hysterical, but also go straight to 100. If you need CPU, you need CPU. It still backs down slowly, but that's just to

Re: better cpu throttling

2010-06-30 Thread Luis Henriques
Probably, a silly question, but here it goes: With this patch, I will not be able to set the perflevel to, say, 50% and keep the system using that performance level forever. Is this correct? I guess that with current apmd we are able to do this. If both of these two statements are true (maybe

Re: better cpu throttling

2010-06-30 Thread Ted Unangst
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Luis Henriques luis.hen...@gmail.com wrote: Probably, a silly question, but here it goes: With this patch, I will not be able to set the perflevel to, say, 50% and keep the system using that performance level forever. Is this correct? I guess that with

Re: better cpu throttling

2010-06-30 Thread Luis Henriques
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 03:34:14PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote: On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Luis Henriques luis.hen...@gmail.com wrote: Probably, a silly question, but here it goes: With this patch, I will not be able to set the perflevel to, say, 50% and keep the system using that

Re: better cpu throttling

2010-06-30 Thread Theo de Raadt
For example, if I am compiling the kernel, my laptop will overheat and shutdown. So, I need to run apm -L in order to keep the temperature lower. Balony. What you are facing is that the acpi throttling code is not handling your laptop fast enough. It is unrelated to the problem that tedu is

Re: better cpu throttling

2010-06-30 Thread Darrin Chandler
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 03:34:14PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote: On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Luis Henriques luis.hen...@gmail.com wrote: Probably, a silly question, but here it goes: With this patch, I will not be able to set the perflevel to, say, 50% and keep the system using that

Re: better cpu throttling

2010-06-30 Thread Theo de Raadt
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 01:46:55PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: For example, if I am compiling the kernel, my laptop will overheat and shutdown. So, I need to run apm -L in order to keep the temperature lower. Balony. What you are facing is that the acpi throttling code is not

Re: better cpu throttling

2010-06-30 Thread Darrin Chandler
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 11:44:46PM +0200, Peter Hessler wrote: On 2010 Jun 30 (Wed) at 22:25:45 +0100 (+0100), Luis Henriques wrote: :Eventually there are usage scenarios where setting the maximum :performance to 50% (or whatever value) may make sense -- if you want to :save some power, for

Re: better cpu throttling

2010-06-30 Thread Tobias Weingartner
On Wednesday, June 30, Darrin Chandler wrote: What you're saying is true, but that's not the only use case. Streaming media may not benefit from 100% cpu but may not be able to work properly at 0%. The same goes for other common tasks as well. Running at 30% or 50% will indeed save power for