| Summary: | sys-kernel/gentoo-sources-2.6.30-r5 cpufreq can't set governor to ondemand | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | g0th1c <gothic0000> |
| Component: | [OLD] Core system | Assignee: | Gentoo Kernel Bug Wranglers and Kernel Maintainers <kernel> |
| Status: | RESOLVED INVALID | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | robert.bradbury |
| Priority: | High | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | x86 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
| Attachments: | my kernel config | ||
|
Description
g0th1c
2009-09-04 10:31:05 UTC
post your .config Created attachment 203202 [details]
my kernel config
All need governor is enabled.
I did some brief research but I ran out of time and I can't read on how cpufreq/p4-clockmod/cpufreq-governors work. I'll just spit the links here 'till I find some time to study the issue. http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15284 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=536183 http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-kernel/2008/6/2/1999844 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474499 It seems that p4-clockmod and the ondemand governor are not really cooperating with each other, but I'm still not sure on the why and how. Okie, the p4-clockmod driver does not use governors (and never did), it talks directly with the ACPI and acts accordingly (see: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474499#c2). The illusion of a regression bug is created because in 2.6.29 p4-clockmod no longer exports a cpufreq interface to sysfs which ondemand was using all that time to be set. The thing is that p4-clockmod never worked according to ondemand's rules whatsoever (see: http://www.codemonkey.org.uk/2009/01/18/forthcoming-p4clockmod/) Because of the above, I'm gonna mark this bug as INVALID. Thanks for your bug report :) *** Bug 287463 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** I believe this bug should be reopened for reasons I have outlined in Bug #287463. I may not fully understand how this works but would be inclined to disagree with Comment #4 because the acpi-cpufreq module cannot load due to errors with the acpi/processor_perflib functions due to insufficient support in the ACPI BIOS for cpu frequency scaling. On a CPU without Intel "Enhanced" SpeedStep(R) (and the associated ACPI BIOS functionality) the correct way to control power consumption seems to be to use the ondemand or conservative governors. (In reply to comment #6) > I believe this bug should be reopened for reasons I have outlined in Bug > #287463. > > I may not fully understand how this works but would be inclined to disagree > with Comment #4 because the acpi-cpufreq module cannot load due to errors with > the acpi/processor_perflib functions due to insufficient support in the ACPI > BIOS for cpu frequency scaling. On a CPU without Intel "Enhanced" SpeedStep(R) > (and the associated ACPI BIOS functionality) the correct way to control power > consumption seems to be to use the ondemand or conservative governors. > Hey Robert, really, my knowledge in this area is not enough to constructively (dis)agree with your arguments and so I would recommend you to pass this upstream. Do post the URL of the upstream bug report here so that we can follow this :) Thank you! PS1: I sent (some months ago) a mail to Dave Jones (the guy behind codemonkey.org) telling him that there are well put complaints regarding the p4-clockmod change and pointed him to bug #283646 and bug #287463, but I didn't get a reply. PS2: I'll leave this as INVALID, 'till I see an answer from upstream if that's okay with you. |