Re: [Powertop] [PATCH v3 29/31] tunables: removed on-demand cpu frequency governor

[Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen at linux.intel.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1639 bytes --]

On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 23:27:52 +0300
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> On (11/18/13 12:27), Alexandra Yates wrote:
> > Remove suggestion to use the on-demand cpu frequency governor from
> > PowerTOP tunables as that is no longer a good suggestion since the
> > P-State driver is the Intel recommended replacement.
> 
> I need to think about it.
> 
> IIRC, in this email
> https://lists.01.org/pipermail/powertop/2013-September/000952.html
> 
> Christian Krause wrote:
> 
> >
> >tunables show:
> >
> >    Bad           Using 'ondemand' cpufreq governor
> >
> >but: I don't have a ondemand cpufreq governor -- that is what I just found out: since some kernel
> >versions ago the intel_pstate driver is the default for my cpu:
> >
> >    # zgrep PSTATE /proc/config.gz
> >    CONFIG_X86_INTEL_PSTATE=y
> >
> >    # cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu[0-9]*/cpufreq/scaling_driver
> >    intel_pstate
> >    intel_pstate
> >    intel_pstate
> >    intel_pstate
> >
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not really sure why we delete cpufreq code and kill this feature.
> 
> 
> 
> for example:
> 
> $ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_available_governors
> ondemand performance
> 
> $ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> performance
> 
> 
> 
> powertop can help here
> 
> 
> 	-ss
> 

Actually, in most cases using performance would be preferred over
ondemand unless you are on ancient hardware.  You may be interested in
reading this article which sort of summarizes the situation.

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTM3NDQ