From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Aug 24 17:43:57 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: acpi@freebsd.org
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 9041016A41F;
	Wed, 24 Aug 2005 17:43:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from oberman@es.net)
Received: from postal2.es.net (postal2.es.net [198.128.3.206])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24F7543D49;
	Wed, 24 Aug 2005 17:43:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from oberman@es.net)
Received: from ptavv.es.net ([198.128.4.29])
	by postal2.es.net (Postal Node 2) with ESMTP (SSL) id IBA74465;
	Wed, 24 Aug 2005 10:43:54 -0700
Received: from ptavv (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by ptavv.es.net (Tachyon Server) with ESMTP id D69945D07;
	Wed, 24 Aug 2005 10:43:54 -0700 (PDT)
To: Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@FreeBSD.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 24 Aug 2005 20:45:13 +0900."
	<yge8xyr5zjq.wl%ume@mahoroba.org> 
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 10:43:54 -0700
From: "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net>
Message-Id: <20050824174354.D69945D07@ptavv.es.net>
Cc: Bruno Ducrot <bruno@FreeBSD.org>, acpi@freebsd.org, njl@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/powerd powerd.c 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: ACPI and power management development <freebsd-acpi.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-acpi>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 17:43:57 -0000

> Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 20:45:13 +0900
> From: Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@FreeBSD.org>
> Sender: owner-cvs-all@freebsd.org
> 
> Hi,
> 
> >>>>> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 20:14:42 +0900
> >>>>> Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@FreeBSD.org> said:
> 
> ume> It feels too lazy for my laptop.  One freq level for decreasing and
> ume> two freq level for incresing is comfortable to me.
> 
> Oops, I meant two and four.
> Because, my main laptop has double CPU levels than my second laptop.
> So, it takes double iteration for transition from highest to lowest or
> from lowest to highest.

Don't know what Nate and Bruno might think, but adding an argument to
set the speed bump up would be trivial to code. If there is consensus
that this is a good idea, it becomes a question of how to design the
user interface. Absolute steps of percent of range come to mind.

I don't think anyone wants to slow down faster than on step at a time.
-- 
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
E-mail: oberman@es.net			Phone: +1 510 486-8634