| 1 |
i don't want to have to adjust it. i want it to step by default as i need, |
| 2 |
and if there are daemons and better governors (the conservative one is |
| 3 |
better in my opionion) i don't really understand why i should something that |
| 4 |
will bother me with tunings when there are things that don't need them and |
| 5 |
which perform better?! |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
2007/8/5, Joshua Hoblitt <jhoblitt@××××××××××.edu>: |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> On Sun, Aug 05, 2007 at 09:24:17AM +0200, Bernhard Auzinger wrote: |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> > I think you are wrong, because the ondemand governor does also switch |
| 12 |
> between |
| 13 |
> > all available frequencies. For example my amd64X2 is capable of |
| 14 |
> > 1000,1800,2000,2200,2400MHz and the ondemand governor does switch very |
| 15 |
> well |
| 16 |
> > between these frequencies if needed. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
i repeat: on my 2 systems it didn't worked in that way, so i don't want to |
| 20 |
spend time bothering about tunings when there is really no need for that. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
That is correct, it moves one "step" per polling cycle the rate of which |
| 23 |
> can be adjusted via the sysfs interface. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> -J |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> -- |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> |
Archives