Re: ondemand cpufreq ineffective in 2.6.12 ?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



11.07.2005 23:55, Con Kolivas wrote/a écrit:
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 05:45, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Ken Moffat wrote:

Hi,

I've been using the ondemand governor on athlon64 winchesters for a few
weeks.  I've just noticed that in 2.6.12 the frequency is not
increasing under load, it remains at the lowest frequency.  This seems
to be down to something in 2.6.12-rc6, but I've seen at least one report
since then that ondemand works fine.  Anybody else seeing this problem ?

And just for the record, it's still not working in 2.6.13-rc2.  Oh
well, back to 2.6.11 for this box.


I noticed a change in ondemand on pentiumM, where it would not ramp up if the task using cpu was +niced. It does ramp up if the task is not niced. This seems to have been considered all round better but at my end it is not - if it takes the same number of cycles to complete a task it does not save any battery running it at 600Mhz vs 1700Mhz, it just takes longer. Yes I know during the initial ramp up the 1700Mhz one will waste more battery, but that is miniscule compared to something that burns cpu constantly for 10 mins. Now I'm forced to run my background tasks at nice 0 and not get the benefit of nicing the tasks, _or_ I have to go diddling with settings in /sys to disable this feature or temporarily move to the performance governor.
echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ondemand/ignore_nice
Put it once for all in your initscript :-)

Although I complained lightly initially when this change was suggested, I didn't realise it was actually going to become standard.
I like it because it avoids that any background task which is ran makes the fans turning like hell. It's also very advantageous with tasks like screensavers or a la seti@home (but few people have this on their laptop).


To me the ondemand governor was supposed to not delay you at all, but cause as much battery saving as possible without noticeable slowdown...

Oh well you can't please everyone all the time.
It's a tradeoff :-)

Ken, does this solve your problems (but that seems strange that all your tasks are nice'd) ?

Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]
  Powered by Linux