From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 30 20:28:09 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5951816A43B for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2005 20:28:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from marco.calviani@gmail.com) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.194]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2472943D8B for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2005 20:27:53 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from marco.calviani@gmail.com) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i7so139526wra for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:27:53 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=BFzHLT2S4I4cCuqoG9iMPe2nzCLCoNLDjVvkS3zZ+HZjOc12NKnXM7mnn/dgCDtxwDeW8wYKZbvFhXX8MWo3ZxlCCabgsfksfkajHeu7/0blOY5bDqGsGngn1TFN6ZeCZ+lguTIX92JYiGBqJbNDz153L6rYwqz0M0hH1gWqMW8= Received: by 10.65.133.19 with SMTP id k19mr439286qbn; Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:27:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.65.243.16 with HTTP; Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:27:52 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 20:27:52 +0000 From: Marco Calviani To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20051130201250.GC4713@poupinou.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <20051130133224.GA4713@poupinou.org> <438DE9D0.6080107@root.org> <20051130201250.GC4713@poupinou.org> Cc: Subject: Re: cpufreq and changing driver X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 20:28:09 -0000 Hi Bruno, > The ondemand governor is basically an implemation of the following > algorithm: > > There is a counter, say count. > > at each given fixed intervall: > if (idle less than a watermark) { > frequency full > reinitialise count to 10 > } else if (idle more than another watermark) { > decrement count > if count is 0 { > down one step the frequency > } > else reinitilize count to 10 > > > Note that in the latter case, the down step is performed only > after 10 such comparison. In other word, intervall is ten times > larger for the down side than the full frequency one. > > This work well when you can perform, say, 20 to 50 transitions per > second. Otherwise, it is pretty bad. > Thanks very much! But i'm not understanding if this high number of transitions are a problem from the hardware point of view or from the software implementation in freeBSD? Best regards, MC