Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753873AbYHKQUz (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2008 12:20:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751430AbYHKQUr (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2008 12:20:47 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:36348 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750817AbYHKQUq (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2008 12:20:46 -0400 Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 09:20:47 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven To: Adrian Bunk Cc: S K , Zhao Yakui , Thomas Renninger , Alan Jenkins , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: cpufreq doesn't seem to work in Intel Q9300 Message-ID: <20080811092047.42bf716b@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20080811160346.GB21292@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> References: <514e099a0808030300u140a0ae7m92a2e7294f39f7b7@mail.gmail.com> <200808081430.43012.trenn@suse.de> <200808092059.47863.trenn@suse.de> <514e099a0808100128u303207clcb22292db2f0cc59@mail.gmail.com> <1218418431.6671.52.camel@yakui_zhao.sh.intel.com> <514e099a0808102144n241c8e9ak255bded0a80744f1@mail.gmail.com> <20080811042244.469f8e1d@infradead.org> <20080811140206.GB3338@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> <20080811071128.0165be50@infradead.org> <20080811160346.GB21292@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> Organization: Intel X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.5.0 (GTK+ 2.12.11; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by casper.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1240 Lines: 36 On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:03:46 +0300 Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 07:11:28AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > >... > > so before you had for one second "20% expensive, 80% low power" > > now you have for one second "20% expensive, 20% throttle power, 60% > > low power" > > > > since throttle power is higher than low/idle power.. you lose. > > So what is the intended use case? > it's thermal throttling. To forcefully reduce the number of cycles that have the full "execute" power in order to clamp the temperature if the cpu is too hot. > > There must be a reason why Intels CPUs support this throttling? yes there is.. for cases where there is overtemperature. Think of it as the emergency break in the subway. You really don't want to use it but when you need it you're glad it's there. -- If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/