From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Dec 11 11:53:32 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CCCD16A4CE
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 11 Dec 2003 11:53:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rootlabs.com (root.org [67.118.192.226])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 42EFF43D29
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 11 Dec 2003 11:53:30 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from nate@rootlabs.com)
Received: (qmail 50481 invoked by uid 1000); 11 Dec 2003 19:53:31 -0000
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 11:53:31 -0800 (PST)
From: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>
To: Ducrot Bruno <ducrot@poupinou.org>
In-Reply-To: <20031211181049.GA3872@poupinou.org>
Message-ID: <20031211115236.B50138@root.org>
References: <20031209175230.I44055@root.org>
	<20031210184201.Y598@korben.in.tern>
	<20031210100527.X46577@root.org> <20031211181049.GA3872@poupinou.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
cc: current@freebsd.org
cc: Lukas Ertl <l.ertl@univie.ac.at>
Subject: Re: ACPI throttling changes
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 19:53:32 -0000

On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, Ducrot Bruno wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 10:06:45AM -0800, Nate Lawson wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 Dec 2003, Lukas Ertl wrote:
> > > On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Nate Lawson wrote:
> > > > I'm working on a shared CPU frequency control driver.  One step is to
> > > > remove some of the autonomy of the throttling portion of acpi_cpu.
> > > > Please test this patch if you have a machine which supports throttling.
> > >
> > > Apropos CPU frequency: is there a way to find out at what frequency the
> > > CPU is running?  And shouldn't SpeedStep have an influence on that?  (Or
> > > is SpeedStep not supported?)
> >
> > This is getting a bit off-topic.  It's too early to discuss how all the
> > different parts of cpufreq work.  The answer is "yes and no", depending on
> > which underlying technologies your laptop has available.  ACPI throttling:
> > yes, SpeedStep: mostly yes, ACPI performance states: no.
>
> ACPI performance states (IO only though) should be ok, no?

There's no way to read the current ACPI performance state value.  The only
thing you can do is set a performance state and validate that it
succeeded.

-Nate