Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 12:05:58 +0900 From: Eric Kjeldergaard <kjelderg@gmail.com> To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Subject: cpufreq and schedulers instead of powerd Message-ID: <d9175cad0512031905g68dd1697x@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello all. I hope this is the right place for such an item. I've been pondering processor dynamic clocking for a while and recently have been wondering if it is optimal to have the processor rate chosen by a daemon as it is now, or rather integrate the downclocking into the scheduler. My reasoning largely is based on the thought of overhead for switching processor speeds. With modernish processors (especially the Pentium-m) it seems that the time to change operating frequencies is very low which would lead me to think that something like a scheduler could take advantage of that and clock them down faster and more often. Also, schedulers (I've been looking mainly at ULE) have more knowledge about processor usage than just the current load which appears to be all that powerd looks at. Does anyone have any additional information on dynamic clock handling in OS schedulers or information on why freebsd chose powerd over an implementation in scheduler(s)? Eric Kjeldergaard -- If I write a signature, my emails will appear more personalised.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d9175cad0512031905g68dd1697x>