Why not some old alg. for governors?
RFC 1/1 Why not some old alg. for governors?
I'm trying to make a new governor based on PAST. I think I will improve somehow things, but would like to get some output before, especially for those who own a low latency switching driver like speedstep-centrino. Since it's a time based thing, I hacked actually ondemand.
Comments are of course welcome!
drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig +14 -0
@@ -127,3 +127,17 @@ config CPU_FREQ_GOV_ONDEMAND For details, take a look at linux/Documentation/cpu-freq. If in doubt, say N. + +config CPU_FREQ_GOV_PAST + tristate "'PAST' cpufreq policy governor" + depends on CPU_FREQ + help + 'past' - This driver adds a dynamic cpufreq policy governor. + The governor does a periodic polling and + changes frequency based on the CPU utilization. + The algorithm used is somehow the one found in + "Scheduling for Reduced CPU Energy", 1984, Mark Weiser et al. + + For details, take a look at linux/Documentation/cpu-freq. + + If in doubt, say N.
drivers/cpufreq/Makefile +1 -0
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_PERFORMANCE) + obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_POWERSAVE) += cpufreq_powersave.o obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_USERSPACE) += cpufreq_userspace.o obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_ONDEMAND) += cpufreq_ondemand.o +obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_PAST) += cpufreq_past.o # CPUfreq cross-arch helpers obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_TABLE) += freq_table.o
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_past.c new file +421 -0
421 lines not on this page · raw message
Cheers,
Signature · 4 lines
Bruno Ducrot -- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy? -- Don't know. Don't care.