> Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 16:33:45 -0800 > From: Nate Lawson <nate_at_root.org> > Sender: owner-freebsd-acpi_at_freebsd.org > Pawel Worach wrote: > > Nate Lawson wrote: > > > >> Attached is a patch that I'd like to get tested. After applying it, > >> rebuild and load the cpufreq.ko module. Be sure you do _not_ have > >> "options CPU_ENABLE_TCC" in your kernel config or the new driver will > >> conflict with the old. > > > > > > Hi Nate, > > > > This is what I get on a TP T41, do the cpufreq results below look right? > > Also if I loaded both modules all I got for dev.cpu.0.freq was -1 or > > 1700 and no levels. > > > > CPU: Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1700MHz (1698.56-MHz 686-class CPU) > > Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x695 Stepping = 5 > > Features=0xa7e9f9bf<FPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,MCE,CX8,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,CLFLUSH,DTS,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,TM,PBE> > > Apologies. I found 2 bugs, one was not calling cpufreq_register() and > the other was that the code to detect acpi_perf (in ichss and est) was > incorrect. I've committed fixes for that and have updated the patch. > Please ues this version and test again. > > Thanks, > -- > Nate Well, it all seems working, but the performance is not proportional to the "frequency". I am attaching the results of testing. The fist column is value of freq and the second is the transfer rate from dd to md5. FWIW, when I did have TCC working I had 31 freq_levels, but if I set the freq below about 200, my system freezes and requires a hard power cycle. I am running ULE but no PREEMPTION. The exact point at which it locks up is not consistent. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: oberman_at_es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:28 UTC