Gentoo Archives: gentoo-amd64

From: "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." <bss03@××××××××××.net>
To: gentoo-amd64@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Lack of 'ondemand' power govenor
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2006 00:19:57
Message-Id: 200609071918.07607.bss03@volumehost.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Lack of 'ondemand' power govenor by Brian Litzinger
1 On Thursday 07 September 2006 18:06, Brian Litzinger
2 <brian@××××××××××××.com> wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-amd64] Lack
3 of 'ondemand' power govenor':
4 > On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 11:04:17AM +1200, Jamie wrote:
5 > > Can anyone offer me any ideas on this, a day of Googling has not
6 > > turned up anything I have found the be useful (although my Google-fu
7 > > has been proven to be weak before)
8 >
9 > If you built the various govenors as modules you have to modprobe them.
10
11 The module name is cpufreq_<governor_name>. In particular, when I was
12 compiling the ondemand governor as a module it was
13 at /lib/modules/2.6.16-gentoo-r7/kernel/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.ko
14
15 --
16 "If there's one thing we've established over the years,
17 it's that the vast majority of our users don't have the slightest
18 clue what's best for them in terms of package stability."
19 -- Gentoo Developer Ciaran McCreesh

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-amd64] Lack of 'ondemand' power govenor Stephen Heuer <sheuer@××××××××××.org>
Re: [gentoo-amd64] Lack of 'ondemand' power govenor Rudmer van Dijk <rudmer.van.dijk@××××××.nl>