Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:06:50 -0800 | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.24-rc4-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.23 |
| |
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 01:01:25 +0100 Guillaume Chazarain <guichaz@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org> wrote: > > > the frequency of both cores is the maximum of what linux sets each > > core to; > > Do you mean that the cpufreq code can be confused about the actual > frequency of the cores?
it means that cpufreq doesn't know the actual frequency (although bios sometimes tells us about the relationship, often the bios just lies through it's teeth); it only knows what it asks for, not what it gets. We know it'll get at least what it asks for, but it can get more than it asks for basically.
>That sounds like a big problem.
it'll get way worse going forward. (but even on todays systems, the tsc no longer represents frequency, but is some fixed clock totally unrelated to cpu frequency)
-- If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |