From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 14 19:44:30 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE44E16A41B for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:44:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nate@root.org) Received: from root.org (root.org [67.118.192.226]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8173813C4D9 for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:44:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nate@root.org) Received: (qmail 71056 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2008 19:44:31 -0000 Received: from ppp-71-139-9-226.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO ?10.0.5.18?) (nate-mail@71.139.9.226) by root.org with ESMTPA; 14 Jan 2008 19:44:31 -0000 Message-ID: <478BBB9C.9090809@root.org> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:44:28 -0800 From: Nate Lawson User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stefan Lambrev References: <200801110909.m0B99tlr097501@lurza.secnetix.de> <47873840.7050401@moneybookers.com> <47894263.6010706@root.org> <478965CC.1010609@moneybookers.com> <47896CCA.9020309@root.org> In-Reply-To: <47896CCA.9020309@root.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1251 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: powerd adaptive mode latching X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:44:30 -0000 Nate Lawson wrote: > Stefan Lambrev wrote: >> Nate Lawson wrote: >>> I am not sure this patch should be committed as-is. It might be better >>> centralized in the cpufreq mid-layer so that all drivers benefit instead >>> of just acpi_perf. If there are frequencies that are too close to each >>> other (no matter what the source driver), it might be good to eliminate >>> them. >>> >>> I'll look into it later today. >>> >>> -Nate >>> >> I fully agree that centralized solution is better. >> But at this late stage of RELENG_7_0, I'm happy with this patch, as it >> solves our problem and is very simple. >> If you can come with something better before 7-RELEASE, it's OK, but >> otherwise I think we should have this patch in the CVS and then >> RELENG_7_0 (even marked as XXX) >> >> The other patch actually is in powerd.c and with it doesn't matter what >> is the source of the information, but I personally, more like the >> acpi_perf patch :) > > Some of us have other jobs that have nothing to do with FreeBSD. > Anyway, attached is the patch (compile tested). You should test without > the acpi_perf patch to be sure it is functionally equivalent. Please test the patch. I need at least one "it works" from someone who has duplicated cpufreq states to commit it to -current. Be sure to first remove any acpi_perf patch that you previously applied. Thanks. -- Nate