From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 15 17:24:08 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DFF416A4CE; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 17:24:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from www.cryptography.com (li-22.members.linode.com [64.5.53.22]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37AE143D41; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 17:24:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nate@root.org) Received: from [10.0.5.51] (adsl-64-171-186-189.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [64.171.186.189]) by www.cryptography.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j1FHO7Zj030026 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 15 Feb 2005 09:24:07 -0800 Message-ID: <42123035.50009@root.org> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 09:24:05 -0800 From: Nate Lawson User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jiawei Ye References: <20050213231306.376E05D07@ptavv.es.net> <420FE3C7.6020003@root.org> <20050214152319.bqxon1xk0g008s4k@netchild.homeip.net> <4210D155.6080706@root.org> <4211A8DD.4010406@root.org> <42122489.4030705@root.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: acpi@freebsd.org cc: Alexander Leidinger cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADSUP: cpufreq import complete, acpi_throttling changed X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 17:24:08 -0000 Jiawei Ye wrote: > On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 08:34:17 -0800, Nate Lawson wrote: > >>>dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1818/-1 1590/-1 1363/-1 1136/-1 909/-1 681/-1 >>>454/-1 227/-1 >> >>I don't know, what's your CPUs actual full speed clock rate? Your >>system only has throttling so the only way to get those levels is to >>estimate the full speed rate and derive the rest from it. I'm working >>to make the estimate more correct in the future, but the current code >>should be right +/- a few Mhz. >> >>-- >>Nate > > Sorry I didn't make myself clear. I was referring to the '-1'. It used > to be 0 there. Yeah, that was part of something I corrected and is right. The power is set to -1 which is "I don't know." Without a base power to derive from, there's no way to know how much each state saves you. Once the Enhanced SpeedStep driver is committed, you'll have more settings and also known power values. So it looks like your system is working just fine. -- Nate