lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: cpufreq default governor
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> On 24/04/07, William Heimbigner <icxcnika@mar.tar.cc> wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
>>
>> > On 24/04/07, William Heimbigner <icxcnika@mar.tar.cc> wrote:
>> > > On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hi William,
>> > > >
>> > > > On 24/04/07, William Heimbigner <icxcnika@mar.tar.cc> wrote:
>> > > > > Question: is there some reason that kconfig does not allow for
>> > > > > default
>> > > > > governors of conservative/ondemand/powersave?
>> > > >
>> > > > Performance?
>> > > >
>> > > > > I'm not aware of any reason why one of those governors could not
>> > > > > be
>> > > > > used
>> > > > > as default.
>> > > >
>> > > > My hardware doesn't work properly with ondemand governor. I hear
>> > > > strange noises when frequency is changed.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > That doesn't mean it isn't working, though.
>> >
>> > I didn't say that cpufreq ondemand is broken. It's a hardware problem.
>> >
>> > > I here weird noises if the cpu
>> > > is clocked anywhere from 333MHz to 1GHz (sounds like an RD-D2 beeping
>> > > noises in ultra high pitch?)
>> >
>> > Yes, something like that.
>>
>> Is it actually "not working" though, even at the hardware level?
>
> It works, but for me this sounds are very weird ;)
>
>> To my
>> knowledge those noises are normal, and aren't even signs of a harware
>> problem. I believe it is the natural result of changing frequencies at any
>> time. If you change frequencies, especially in the low end of available
>> frequencies, you should hear a very brief noise. A governor such as
>> ondemand, which is rapidly switching the frequency from say, 333 MHz to
>> 2.66 GHz, is likely to make this much more noticable.
>
> Ok, it might be normal behavior. I might be wrong, but IMO users
> prefer speed and no strange sounds as default setting.

I agree! My suggestion, however, is that if they do want a different
scheduler as the default, they can choose one.

There are some cases in which this could be very useful. A couple examples
would be the processor with poor cooling that overheats easily, or a
laptop with a poor battery.

However, on second thought with regards to Kconfig, would it be feasible
to have performance always be the default, unless a
"cpufreqgov=conservative" arguement was specified on the command line?

This would be less susceptible to users complaining that their cpu is
chirping all of a sudden.

William Heimbigner
icxcnika@mar.tar.cc
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-04-24 15:29    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site