powerd adaptive mode latching

Nate Lawson nate at root.org
Sat Jan 12 17:43:41 PST 2008

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.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: cpufreq_uniq1.diff
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 820 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/attachments/20080113/92f299ba/cpufreq_uniq1.bin

More information about the freebsd-current mailing list