Daniel Gimpelevich schrieb:
> On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 12:46 +0000, Hanno Stock (hefe_bia) wrote:
>> So there are several options:
>>
>> 1) disable all power management in g-p-m.
>> 2) disable power management in g-p-m by default, but let users change
>> it.
>> 3) disable power management in g-p-m only when powernowd is installed,
>> which is tricky to implement because of install order.
>
> Option 3 is out of the question, and option 2 is still preferable to
> option 1, especially in light of bug 93404.
(with "all power management" I meant "...related to the CPU" of course.)
Regarding bug 93404: IF the user would change the governor in g-p-m this
would deactivate powernowd, which would - if the conservative governor
doesn't work with the chipset - deactivate cpu throttling all together.
It is also possible to configure powernowd to act more like the
conservative governor.
But these are really two different things and making it all user
configurable without the several methods (powernowd and g-p-m / cpufreq)
conflicting is beyond bug fixing, IMHO.
I think this would be worth a spec ("clean up the cpu throttling mess"
or something alike ;) ).
The original intention of this bug report and discussion was to fix a
regression. This means: Make powernowd work as it did before.
I'd really prefer to stall this discussion until someone with more
experience and maybe knowledge about future plans for power management
takes a look at it.
--
[hardy] Regression: powernowd no longer works with some chipsets
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/223812
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
