On Sun, 2012-12-02 at 18:57 +0100, Andreas Glaeser wrote: > Package: cpufreqd > Version: 2.4.2-1 > Severity: wishlist > > Dear Maintainer, > *** Please consider answering these questions, where appropriate *** > > * What led up to the situation? > * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or > ineffective)? > * What was the outcome of this action? > * What outcome did you expect instead? > > *** End of the template - remove these lines *** > Frequency scaling was not enabled by default, but the system was running at > full speed. I > think CPU-frequency scaling management should not be managed by the kernel > anyway, because > it is not properly configurable this way. It was a bit tricky to set up > cpufreqd in > working state across reboots with full scaling-range, > because /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/cpuinfo_min_freq > and /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq contained varying > values, but > with the attached /etc/init.d/cpufrequtils file it works finally. In my > opinion cpufreqd > should be installed on any desktop-system by default, because it does not do > any harm, if > the hardware does not provide the scaling-feature.
CPU frequency scaling should be enabled, but it's debatable whether cpufreqd is needed by most users. > This report refers to my previous report: 694...@bugs.debian.org. You still haven't answered the questions I asked there. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings It is easier to change the specification to fit the program than vice versa.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
