Marco Calviani wrote:
Hi Bruno,
> > 2) sorry what about the point that we were discussing above? The high
number of transition you were explaining me, are present in the actual
implementation of powerd, and if not, why?
It's not present under powerd for the simple fact that to be efficient
in term of not being too intrusive (kernel to user data transfers, etc),
powerd can only provide a limited number of check per second (at this
time, 2 per second). But the current algorithm present in powerd is
not well suited in that case. You have to wait one demi-second
for the processor being put to full speed if the system was idle
before.
Are there on the horizon any sort of plans to implement a newer and
more efficient algorithm to increase the number of transition per
second? Sorry but i've not understood why linux-cpufreqd is able to
cope with those without being so intrusive.....
This work is easy, it's just grunt work implementing and testing to see
which is best. See this page for details on how to proceed:
http://wikitest.freebsd.org/moin.cgi/powerd
Wikitest seems to be down so here's the text only:
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:IEXV5nW17ZMJ:wikitest.freebsd.org/moin.cgi/powerd+site:wikitest.freebsd.org+powerd+&hl=en&lr=&strip=1
--
Nate
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
