Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 6 Feb 2012 16:31:06 +0000 | From | Matthew Garrett <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/5] ACPI: Do cpufreq clamping for throttling per package v2 |
| |
On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 08:17:11AM -0800, Andi Kleen wrote: > +#define reduction_pctg(cpu) \ > + per_cpu(cpufreq_thermal_reduction_pctg, phys_package_first_cpu(cpu))
I don't like using percentages here - we end up with the potential for several percentages to end up mapping to the same P state. I've sent a patch that replaces the percentage code with just stepping through P states instead. But otherwise, yes, this seems sensible. An open question is whether we should be doing the same on _PPC notifications. There's some vague evidence that Windows does.
-- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
| |