On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 15:52:06 +0100
Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> * Guillaume Chazarain <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Le Fri, 7 Dec 2007 14:55:25 +0100,
> > Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> a ??crit :
> >
> > > Firstly, we dont need the 'offset' anymore because cpu_clock()
> > > maintains offsets itself.
> >
> > Yes, but a lower quality one. __update_rq_clock tries to compensate
> > large jumping clocks with a jiffy resolution, while my offset
> > arranges for a very smooth frequency transition.
>
> yes, but that would be easy to fix up via calling
> sched_clock_idle_wakeup_event(0) when doing a frequency transition,
> without burdening the normal sched_clock() codepath with the offset.
> See the attached latest version.
can this deal with dual/quad core where the frequency of one core
changes if the sofware changes the frequency of the other core?
--
If you want to reach me at my work email, use [email protected]
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
