According to Matthew Garrett (http://mjg59.livejournal.com/88608.htm)
the default should be to not set any other profile other then ondemand.
** Changed in: guidance-power-manager (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Invalid
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support conservative CPUFreq gouvernor
According to Matthew Garrett (http://mjg59.livejournal.com/88608.html)
the default should be to not set any other profile other then ondemand.
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support conservative CPUFreq gouvernor
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/109197
You received this bug notification because
The cpufreq developers disagree on that. And I strongly disagree on
that. On my notebook, 1000MHz is a lot faster that 800MHz, because it
makes the memory clock and access-time much faster. It's not just the
CPU that scales up.
But anyone should understand that conservative is still better that
David I share your view, but there seems to be much new information showing it
other wise.
I'll try to measure my power drain and battery duration to see if I can get a
better view on this subject.
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support conservative CPUFreq gouvernor
The most important point of this bugreport was to get conservative
support into guidance-power-manager, not necessarily as the preferred-
over-ondemand one. But without ondemand, conservative should be the
alternative, not powersave as that is not a dynamic cpufreq policy at
all.
--
I was hesitating a bit, but apparently this bug has been fixed,
conservative is now considered a dynamic cpufreq policy.
** Changed in: guidance-power-manager (Ubuntu)
Status: Invalid = Fix Released
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support conservative CPUFreq gouvernor
Did this ever get done? Why is it invalid?
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support conservative CPUFreq gouvernor
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/109197
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
Needs to get moved to the KDE4 port and looked at. No, it never got
done.
** Changed in: guidance-power-manager (Ubuntu)
Sourcepackagename: kde-guidance = guidance-power-manager
Importance: Undecided = Wishlist
Status: Invalid = New
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support conservative
I would agree that David's proposal is fine, so we would only redefine the
meaning of Dynamic to try the following modes (in this order):
- on AC: ondemand, conservative, userspace
- on battery: conservative, ondemand, userspace
I can work on this patch for Feisty+1 (probably in next day or
I can do it too, I just wanted to prevent that two people write a
different version of the same patch...
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support conservative CPUFreq gouvernor
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/109197
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kubuntu
Team, which
that's fine with me. It wouldn't hurt either to use conservative in
both situations, but I'd prefer to use ondemand on AC.
Who writes the patch?
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support conservative CPUFreq gouvernor
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/109197
You received this bug notification because
On Monday 23 April 2007 20:46:21 DavidG wrote:
that's fine with me. It wouldn't hurt either to use conservative in
both situations, but I'd prefer to use ondemand on AC.
Who writes the patch?
You asked for it :-)
I've some serious time constraints at the moment, so it would take some time.
** Attachment added: [diff 1/2] add support for conservative cpufreq
gouvernor to powermanage.py
http://librarian.launchpad.net/7390138/powermanage.diff
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support conservative CPUFreq gouvernor
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/109197
You received this bug
** Attachment added: [diff 2/2] add support for conservative cpufreq
gouvernor to guidance-power-manager.py
http://librarian.launchpad.net/7390145/guidance-power-manager.diff
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support conservative CPUFreq gouvernor
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/109197
You
Hi David,
First, thanks for the patch. There are some tab/space issues in there,
this *might* work, but it's broken -- don't mix space with tabs in
python scripts.
As to the actual functionality: I'm inclined to not merge it.
Powermanager should be kept simple, we decided (together with
Hi Sebas,
Odd, kate shows no spaces/tabs inconsistencies at all... As a python hacker I
know how important this is. Maybe a upload/download bug?
(The only thing I can find is some trailing spaces on the original and existing
trivial inconsistencies... ;-) )
Anyway, I agree Powermanager should
FYI, conservative is a dynamic governor optimized for battery usage.
ondemand is a dynamic governor optimized for AC usage... IMHO, it's no
loss using conservative on AC power. On battery, when using ondemand
instead of conservative on my laptop, it costs me at least half an
hour of battery time!
Hi David,
The lines starting with action use tabs (but as you state, there is
some inconsistency in the released code as well (it's fixed in SVN
already, that's also why I double-checked).
I do not understand your rationale, however. For example:
- Why should we use 'userspace' at all (there is
- We seem to be using userspace at the moment as a fallback for ondemand (see
powermanage.py). Removing this is out of the scope of this bug/feature-request.
- powersave is not a dynamic governor, it is plain the slowest frequency
possible. (In contrary to Performance, which is plain the fastest
On Monday 23 April 2007 16:35:53 DavidG wrote:
FYI, conservative is a dynamic governor optimized for battery usage.
ondemand is a dynamic governor optimized for AC usage... IMHO, it's no
loss using conservative on AC power. On battery, when using ondemand
instead of conservative on my laptop,
20 matches
Mail list logo
