Re: [PATCH 4/5] ACPI: Do cpufreq clamping for throttling perpackage v2

From: Matthew Garrett
Date: Mon Feb 06 2012 - 11:31:06 EST

On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 08:17:11AM -0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> +#define reduction_pctg(cpu) \
> + per_cpu(cpufreq_thermal_reduction_pctg, phys_package_first_cpu(cpu))

I don't like using percentages here - we end up with the potential for
several percentages to end up mapping to the same P state. I've sent a
patch that replaces the percentage code with just stepping through P
states instead. But otherwise, yes, this seems sensible. An open
question is whether we should be doing the same on _PPC notifications.
There's some vague evidence that Windows does.

Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at