Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 18:14:01 +0100 From: martinko <martinkov@pobox.sk> To: Kevin Oberman <oberman@es.net> Cc: Melvyn Sopacua <freebsd.stable@melvyn.homeunix.org>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006 Message-ID: <43A44759.805@pobox.sk> In-Reply-To: <20051216205327.4D7BF5D09@ptavv.es.net> References: <20051216202938.GA36252@nowhere> <20051216205327.4D7BF5D09@ptavv.es.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kevin Oberman wrote: >>Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 14:29:39 -0600 >>From: Craig Boston <craig@feniz.gank.org> >>Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org >> >> >>>-cpu0: <ACPI CPU (4 Cx states)> on acpi0 >>>+cpu0: <ACPI CPU> on acpi0 >>> >>>Q: Guessing that's a formatting difference, rather then 6.x not recognizing >>>the states (sysctl hw.acpi.cpu.cx_supported confirms 4 states) >> >>Not sure on this, but you're probably better off using EST anyway as I >>think it gives you more control over the processor frequency. > > > No. There is no conflict between Cx states and EST. Cx states specifies > how deeply the CPU will sleep when idle. EST controls processor speed > and voltage. In most cases, your REALLY want to use both of these. They > are very significant in saving power. (Of course, USB tends to limit the > effectiveness of Cx states. I need to run without USB to get really good > battery life and to make suspend (S3) really ut power drain. Kevin, I used to have 3 Cx states supported when I started with FreeBSD on version 5.3. Since I upgraded to 5.4 and recently to 6.0, all I can see is just one supported Cx state. I much wonder why. (?) Cheers, Martin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43A44759.805>