From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 5 16:26:11 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2C4942D; Mon, 5 May 2014 16:26:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (bigwig.baldwin.cx [IPv6:2001:470:1f11:75::1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A350112; Mon, 5 May 2014 16:26:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (unknown [209.249.190.124]) by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 900AEB941; Mon, 5 May 2014 12:26:10 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Leaving the Desktop Market Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 11:42:38 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (FreeBSD/8.4-CBSD-20140415; KDE/4.5.5; amd64; ; ) References: <536673ED.207@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201405051142.39034.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Mon, 05 May 2014 12:26:10 -0400 (EDT) Cc: Adrian Chadd , Nathan Whitehorn X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 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, 05 May 2014 16:26:11 -0000 On Sunday, May 04, 2014 4:40:02 pm Adrian Chadd wrote: > Hm, I was hoping for a little more discussion. Mostly around the > "which older CPUs do we leave this on for?" crowd. > > I have Pentium-M class hardware that I was going to spin up -HEAD on. > > So I'll go install -HEAD on said older hardware and get a list of what > does and doesn't work. I'm totally fine with disabling p4tcc and > acpi_throttle if P states for cpu frequency adjustment are available. > I just want to ensure that the temperature throttling stuff is going > to get automatically engaged (by whichever magical BIOS/ACPI/SMI thing > does it) and clock things down if the CPU gets way too hot. The only things that should use throttling are really old machines where ACPI asks the OS to do passive cooling by exposing the TC1 and TC2 constants. (I have an old P4 laptop where this is the case, I think Pentium-M is too new to need this.) If we keep TCC at all, it should not be tied into cpufreq but be a separate thing that only acpi_thermal.c uses. -- John Baldwin