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..... Best regards, MC _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
