Hi Nate, Nate Lawson wrote: > Stefan Lambrev wrote: > >> It works :) >> >> Nate Lawson wrote: >> >>> Nate Lawson wrote: >>> Please test the patch. I need at least one "it works" from someone who >>> has duplicated cpufreq states to commit it to -current. Be sure to >>> first remove any acpi_perf patch that you previously applied. Thanks. >>> >>> >>> >> I applied your patch on clean releng_7_0 from today an it works - here >> is the output from sysctl: >> >> dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2201/35000 1925/30625 1650/26250 1600/23000 >> 1400/20125 1200/16000 1050/14000 900/12000 800/14000 700/12250 600/10500 >> > > Thanks for testing. Can you be sure the 2201 Mhz setting works > properly. Perhaps you can set dev.cpu.0.freq=2201 then 1600 and be sure > it has approximately correct CPU performance. One test I use is: > > dd if=/dev/zero bs=128k count=N | sha256 > > where "N" is some number that takes about 10 seconds to complete. > > dev.cpu.0.freq: 2201 dd if=/dev/zero bs=128k count=10000 | sha256 - takes 16.453 sec at dev.cpu.0.freq: 1925 it takes 19.020 sec at dev.cpu.0.freq: 1600 - 22.629 sec Everything works as expected. :) -- Best Wishes, Stefan Lambrev ICQ# 24134177Received on Tue Jan 15 2008 - 06:50:24 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:26 UTC