I was hesitating a bit, but apparently this bug has been fixed,
conservative is now considered a "dynamic" cpufreq policy.
** Changed in: guidance-power-manager (Ubuntu)
Status: Invalid => Fix Released
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support "conservative" CPUFreq gouvernor
https://bugs.lau
The most important point of this bugreport was to get conservative
support into guidance-power-manager, not necessarily as the preferred-
over-ondemand one. But without ondemand, conservative should be the
alternative, not powersave as that is not a dynamic cpufreq policy at
all.
--
kde-guidance-
David I share your view, but there seems to be much new information showing it
other wise.
I'll try to measure my power drain and battery duration to see if I can get a
better view on this subject.
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support "conservative" CPUFreq gouvernor
https://bugs.launchpad.net
The cpufreq developers disagree on that. And I strongly disagree on
that. On my notebook, 1000MHz is a lot faster that 800MHz, because it
makes the memory clock and access-time much faster. It's not just the
CPU that scales up.
But anyone should understand that conservative is still better that
pe
According to Matthew Garrett (http://mjg59.livejournal.com/88608.html)
the default should be to not set any other profile other then ondemand.
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support "conservative" CPUFreq gouvernor
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/109197
You received this bug notification because y
According to Matthew Garrett (http://mjg59.livejournal.com/88608.htm)
the default should be to not set any other profile other then ondemand.
** Changed in: guidance-power-manager (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support "conservative" CPUFreq gouvernor
https:
Needs to get moved to the KDE4 port and looked at. No, it never got
done.
** Changed in: guidance-power-manager (Ubuntu)
Sourcepackagename: kde-guidance => guidance-power-manager
Importance: Undecided => Wishlist
Status: Invalid => New
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support "conservativ
Did this ever get done? Why is it invalid?
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support "conservative" CPUFreq gouvernor
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/109197
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu
I can do it too, I just wanted to prevent that two people write a
different version of the same patch...
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support "conservative" CPUFreq gouvernor
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/109197
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kubuntu
Team, which
I would agree that David's proposal is fine, so we would only redefine the
meaning of Dynamic to try the following modes (in this order):
- on AC: ondemand, conservative, userspace
- on battery: conservative, ondemand, userspace
I can work on this patch for Feisty+1 (probably in next day or two).
On Monday 23 April 2007 20:46:21 DavidG wrote:
> that's fine with me. It wouldn't hurt either to use "conservative" in
> both situations, but I'd prefer to use "ondemand" on AC.
>
> Who writes the patch?
You asked for it :-)
I've some serious time constraints at the moment, so it would take some
that's fine with me. It wouldn't hurt either to use "conservative" in
both situations, but I'd prefer to use "ondemand" on AC.
Who writes the patch?
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support "conservative" CPUFreq gouvernor
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/109197
You received this bug notification be
On Monday 23 April 2007 16:35:53 DavidG wrote:
> FYI, "conservative" is a dynamic governor optimized for battery usage.
> "ondemand" is a dynamic governor optimized for AC usage... IMHO, it's no
> loss using "conservative" on AC power. On battery, when using "ondemand"
> instead of "conservative" o
- We seem to be using "userspace" at the moment as a fallback for ondemand (see
powermanage.py). Removing this is out of the scope of this bug/feature-request.
- "powersave" is not a dynamic governor, it is plain the slowest frequency
possible. (In contrary to Performance, which is plain the fast
Hi David,
The lines starting with "action" use tabs (but as you state, there is
some inconsistency in the released code as well (it's fixed in SVN
already, that's also why I double-checked).
I do not understand your rationale, however. For example:
- Why should we use 'userspace' at all (there i
FYI, "conservative" is a dynamic governor optimized for battery usage.
"ondemand" is a dynamic governor optimized for AC usage... IMHO, it's no
loss using "conservative" on AC power. On battery, when using "ondemand"
instead of "conservative" on my laptop, it costs me at least half an
hour of batte
Hi Sebas,
Odd, kate shows no spaces/tabs inconsistencies at all... As a python hacker I
know how important this is. Maybe a upload/download bug?
(The only thing I can find is some trailing spaces on the original and existing
trivial inconsistencies... ;-) )
Anyway, I agree Powermanager should
Hi David,
First, thanks for the patch. There are some tab/space issues in there,
this *might* work, but it's broken -- don't mix space with tabs in
python scripts.
As to the actual functionality: I'm inclined to not merge it.
Powermanager should be kept simple, we decided (together with usability
** Attachment added: "[diff 2/2] add support for "conservative" cpufreq
gouvernor to guidance-power-manager.py"
http://librarian.launchpad.net/7390145/guidance-power-manager.diff
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support "conservative" CPUFreq gouvernor
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/109197
You
** Attachment added: "[diff 1/2] add support for "conservative" cpufreq
gouvernor to powermanage.py"
http://librarian.launchpad.net/7390138/powermanage.diff
--
kde-guidance-powermanager: support "conservative" CPUFreq gouvernor
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/109197
You received this bug not
20 matches
Mail list logo
