Re: [PATCH] cpufreq_ondemand

[Alexander Clouter]

On Oct 18, Con Kolivas wrote:
> 
> I'd much prefer it shot up to 100% or else every time the cpu usage went 
> up there'd be an obvious lag till the machine ran at it's capable speed. 
>  I very much doubt the small amount of time it spent at 100% speed with 
> the default design would decrease the battery life significantly as well.
> 
The issue I found was that if you are running a process that is io bound, for
example, then you may never need to run your cpu at 100%, it will speed up
bit by bit[1] till it gets to a speed that is fast enough to to deal with it
without max'ing the cpufreq.

This is after all exactly want most (if not all) the userspace daemons try to 
do anyway.

Cheers

Alex

[1] also you might find that the task does not last long enough to warrant 
	jumping and lurking at 100% speed anyway

-- 
 _________________________________________ 
/ It's always darkest just before it gets \
\ pitch black.                            /
 ----------------------------------------- 
        \   ^__^
         \  (oo)\_______
            (__)\       )\/\
                ||----w |
                ||     ||

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature