New: Unable to use any kind of frequency scaling

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29522

Summary: Unable to use any kind of frequency scaling
Product: Power Management
Version: 2.5
Kernel Version: 2.6.38-rc5
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Tree: Mainline
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P1
Component: cpufreq
AssignedTo: [email protected]
ReportedBy: [email protected]
Regression: No

Hi.

I have a Pentium D 805 with a Gigabyte motherboard that is only able to reduce its speed with p4-clockmod and with the userspace governor (with the help of the powernowd daemon controlling it), not with the ondemand/conservative (since these modules say---correctly---that the latency is too high for them).

Since I see that p4-clockmod is frowned upon, I would like to get this fixed.

Is there anything that I could help with so that this could get fixed?

Thanks,

Rogério Brito.

P.S.: Right now, I am compiling a new kernel (from Linus git tree, up-to-date) with the following change, just to see its behaviour:

@@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ static int cpufreq_p4_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy

*policy)

/* the transition latency is set to be 1 higher than the maximum
* transition latency of the ondemand governor */
- policy->cpuinfo.transition_latency = 10000001;

+       policy->cpuinfo.transition_latency = 100000;
        policy->cur = stock_freq;

        return cpufreq_frequency_table_cpuinfo(policy, &p4clockmod_table[0]);

Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29522

--- Comment #1 from Rogério Brito <[email protected]> 2011-02-20 10:48:12 --- Hi there.

Just as an extra data point, with the patch that I sent in the earlier package, I can indeed (as expected) set lower frequencies with ondemand (that is, *it* sets the frequency dynamically).

One benefit of this is that, when my computer is left idle, it does not heat as much as it used to, but I fear that there is no voltage being decreased, and, therefore, no power economy.

Is that right? How should one implement it "the right way"? I just know some C, but I don't know how program physical devices. I can, OTOH, test as many patches as you'd like me to.

Thanks in advance for any help, Rogério Brito.

Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29522

--- Comment #2 from Rogério Brito <[email protected]> 2011-02-20 10:50:29 --- Oh, and I can provide as many details from this computer as is feasible. It is currently my main workstation and development box.

I may not have access to it during vacations and travels, though.

Thanks again,
Rogério Brito.

Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29522

Zhang Rui <[email protected]> changed:

What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

             Status|NEW                         |NEEDINFO
                 CC|                            |[email protected]

--- Comment #3 from Zhang Rui <[email protected]> 2012-01-18 03:15:02 --- It's great that the kernel bugzilla is back.

Can you please verify if the problem still exists in the latest upstream kernel?

Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29522

Alan <[email protected]> changed:

What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 CC|                            |[email protected]
         AssignedTo|[email protected]     |[email protected]

Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.