Re: A simple cpufreq(9)

[Jukka Ruohonen <jruohonen%iki.fi@localhost>]

On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 06:10:46AM +0000, Michael van Elst wrote:
> Pick one low and one high value and select these when the core/cpu/machine
> is idle vs. when the machine is busy. Selecting the low and the high
> value is much easier for a human when you label it in terms of the
> specific platform intead of a misleading percentage.

I agree: this is naturally the simplest and most consistent approach.
(And most of all, it is that especially for the kernel.)

In my opinion this would satisfy well the requirements of CPU frequency
scaling in NetBSD. But do we have strong cases in favor of the intermediate
values? As I see it, stepping always to the highest value when in load would
only trade some minor power consumption increase for simplicity.

- Jukka.