From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jul  5 09:01:50 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B6D51FC
 for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Fri,  5 Jul 2013 09:01:50 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7BA61D70
 for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Fri,  5 Jul 2013 09:01:49 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from porto.starpoint.kiev.ua (porto-e.starpoint.kiev.ua
 [212.40.38.100])
 by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id MAA26625;
 Fri, 05 Jul 2013 12:01:41 +0300 (EEST)
 (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1])
 by porto.starpoint.kiev.ua with esmtp (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD))
 id 1Uv1tc-000JA8-SP; Fri, 05 Jul 2013 12:01:40 +0300
Message-ID: <51D68B23.1020104@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 12:00:19 +0300
From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/20130405 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jia-Shiun Li <jiashiun@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: cpufreq not working as module on i386/amd64
References: <AANLkTi=Ln7f9tWt=OqZa9eZ-ZAVBfQSC-y_=8c-6zwAd@mail.gmail.com>
 <20110129084125.GA54969@freebsd.org>
 <CAHNYxxPZMUMDMBo0tRSSjJZWqDD7BNR7BdadcVfZk5nDHS2c1A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHNYxxOCDMzumJS9S9=tmrwdjunrp6wsH5TOgLO6EEU9OAkhaQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20130108150155.GF82219@kib.kiev.ua>
 <CAHNYxxM++gCFS=H+vc6hWYPXkYBp+w29cwL_zdHTVjU824_w_w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHNYxxM++gCFS=H+vc6hWYPXkYBp+w29cwL_zdHTVjU824_w_w@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
 <freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-hackers>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 09:01:50 -0000

on 04/07/2013 08:37 Jia-Shiun Li said the following:
> ok anyone can help test and review this patch?

I can not bless this change, but I won't argue against it either.

My opinion is still that OS should advertise to ACPI the capabilities that it
actually has not those that it potentially may have.  So I prefer the status
quo.  I think that this is a minor issue and cpufreq should just be in kernel,
and that's it.

> It will allow cpufreq to be removed from kernel conf, loaded and
> function correctly as kernel module. I've tested it ok on my own
> i5-3450.
> 
> It removes get_features method definition from acpi_if.m and
> corresponding implementations from est, p4tcc, & hwpstate. Feature
> flags are set directly in acpi_cpu.c omitting previous procedure of
> querying cpufreq drivers.
> 
> 
> After this, I'd like to find some ways to feed CPU loading info
> directly in kernel to cpufreq for finer & quicker control of
> frequencies.


-- 
Andriy Gapon