From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 17 20:00:06 2006 Return-Path: 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 12BCA16A41F for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:00:06 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nate@root.org) Received: from www.cryptography.com (li-22.members.linode.com [64.5.53.22]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3D8143D72 for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:59:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nate@root.org) Received: from [10.0.0.53] (adsl-67-119-74-222.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net [67.119.74.222]) by www.cryptography.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k0HJxvVK029636 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:59:58 -0800 Message-ID: <43CD4CD8.9080402@root.org> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:00:24 -0800 From: Nate Lawson User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ulrich Spoerlein References: <20060117185633.GE1381@galgenberg.net> In-Reply-To: <20060117185633.GE1381@galgenberg.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: acpi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: powerd: How to really disable acpi_throttle? X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:00:06 -0000 Ulrich Spoerlein wrote: > Hi guys, > > I put > > hint.acpi_perf.0.disabled="1" > hint.acpi_throttle.0.disabled="1" > > into /boot/loader.conf and /boot/device.hints, but the acpi_throttle > module still seems to attach > > % dmesg|grep cpu > cpu0: on acpi0 > est0: on cpu0 > p4tcc0: on cpu0 acpi_throttle and p4tcc are different drivers. So: hint.p4tcc.0.disabled="1" > Btw, who decides how those frequencies are chosen? Is the 600MHz setting > made by 600MHz-EST * 100% throttle or is it 1200MHz-EST and 50% > throttle? There is a optimization phase in cpufreq that prefers frequencies generated by absolute drivers more than relative. So 600 * 100% would be chosen, not 1200 * 50%. -- Nate