Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 19:33:39 -0700 From: Kevin Oberman <kob6558@gmail.com> To: Zoran Kolic <zkolic@sbb.rs> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cx_lowest on 9 Message-ID: <CAN6yY1s2K6ZdDU0tWQv13YMjuRk_PR5jdrovUxy1aFmAJkpzVg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120925154413.GA1234@mycenae.sbb.rs> References: <20120925154413.GA1234@mycenae.sbb.rs>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 8:44 AM, Zoran Kolic <zkolic@sbb.rs> wrote: > Dear list! > For a long time I used powerd and cpufreq with options: > performance_cx_lowest="LOW" > economy_cx_lowest="LOW" > in rc.conf on my laptop. > Reading posts on the net I learned that I have/had to use > C2 and C3. What would be the preffered option in coming > 9.1? There is a chance I misread the whole thing. > On old desktop I avoided cx part, but gonna try in out > now. Also, I'd like to learn what the list thinks about > throttle option set to 1. > Any news on 9.1 schedule? No news on the schedule, but with 9.1 Beta, the code has finally been fixed to deal with several issues and the correct answer is: performance_cx_lowest="Cmax" economy_cx_lowest="Cmax" And, no, I don't recall where it is documented, only that I could not find it and the Andriy, the developer, told me in response to my query on acpi@. I can tell you that it works correctly on my ThinkPad T520. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer E-mail: kob6558@gmail.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAN6yY1s2K6ZdDU0tWQv13YMjuRk_PR5jdrovUxy1aFmAJkpzVg>