From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dominik Brodowski Subject: Re: [PATCH] 1/3 Dynamic cpufreq governor and updates to ACPI P-state driver Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 21:57:38 +0200 Sender: cpufreq-bounces@www.linux.org.uk Message-ID: <20031021195738.GA26971@brodo.de> References: <88056F38E9E48644A0F562A38C64FB6007791A@scsmsx403.sc.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <88056F38E9E48644A0F562A38C64FB6007791A@scsmsx403.sc.intel.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: cpufreq-bounces@www.linux.org.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" Cc: "Mallick, Asit K" , Ducrot Bruno , cpufreq@www.linux.org.uk, "Nakajima, Jun" On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 10:15:31AM -0700, Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ducrot Bruno [mailto:ducrot@poupinou.org] > > > > There is already a patch from Dominik Brodowski for the apci > > p-state which IMHO > > is better at least by design. > > Are you referring to cleanup of ACPI P-state driver by Dominik? > That patch is indeed nice and clean. But that is mostly > orthogonal to this patch. I mean, > - SMP awareness in P-state driver > - P-state coordination between HT siblings > will still be required even after Dominik's patch. Though exact > location of these changes will change when applied over Dominik's > patch. > > There is a small overlap in handling MSR based P-state transitions, > but that is a real minor change in my patch and I am reusing most > of the existing IO based transitions code for MSR based ones. Indeed there is. However, as 2.6. is in a "stability freeze" right now, my pretty invasive cleanup won't have a chance of going in soon. I'd like to separate the issues with the p-state driver from the demandbased cpufreq governor, though... Dominik