Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Subject | Re: cpufreq problem wrt suspend/resume on Athlon64 | Date | Thu, 3 Feb 2005 12:30:19 +0100 |
| |
On Thursday, 3 of February 2005 12:01, Dominik Brodowski wrote: > On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 11:58:46AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Hi! > > > > > On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 11:41:26AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > Okay, you are right, restoring it unconditionaly would be bad > > > > idea. Still it would be nice to tell cpufreq governor "please change > > > > the frequency ASAP" so it does not run at 800MHz for half an hour > > > > compiling kernels on AC power. > > > > > > It already does that... or at least it should. in cpufreq_resume() there is > > > a call to schedule_work(&cpu_policy->update); which will cause a call > > > cpufreq_update_policy() in due course. And cpufreq_update_policy() calls the > > > governor, and it is supposed to adjust the frequency to the user's wish > > > then. > > > > Ok, so Rafael's suspend() routine seems like good fix... > > No. I don't see a reason why my desktop P4 should drop to 12.5 frequency > (p4-clockmod) if I ask it to suspend to mem.
So, would it be acceptable to check in _suspend() if the state is S4 and drop the frequency in that case or do nothing otherwise?
Rafael
-- - Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here? - That depends a good deal on where you want to get to. -- Lewis Carroll "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |