cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/powerd powerd.c

[Bruno Ducrot]

On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 10:43:54AM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> > Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 20:45:13 +0900
> > From: Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume at FreeBSD.org>
> > Sender: owner-cvs-all at freebsd.org
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > >>>>> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 20:14:42 +0900
> > >>>>> Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume at FreeBSD.org> said:
> > 
> > ume> It feels too lazy for my laptop.  One freq level for decreasing and
> > ume> two freq level for incresing is comfortable to me.
> > 
> > Oops, I meant two and four.
> > Because, my main laptop has double CPU levels than my second laptop.
> > So, it takes double iteration for transition from highest to lowest or
> > from lowest to highest.
> 
> Don't know what Nate and Bruno might think, but adding an argument to
> set the speed bump up would be trivial to code. If there is consensus
> that this is a good idea, it becomes a question of how to design the
> user interface. Absolute steps of percent of range come to mind.
> 
> I don't think anyone wants to slow down faster than on step at a time.

The problem is that umemoto-san do have a lot of frequencies
available.  It's a kind of "don't use all of them" somehow.  In that
case, it's more "use half of them".
Anyway, I think the only frequencies really usefull for power saving
purpose are the ones given by the est driver.

Cheers,

-- 
Bruno Ducrot

--  Which is worse:  ignorance or apathy?
--  Don't know.  Don't care.