Update on DeviceKit
hmacht at suse.de
Thu May 8 08:18:13 PDT 2008
On Thu 08. May - 16:10:59, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 04:50:31PM +0200, Holger Macht wrote:
> > Hey, it's just an abstract interface. Every system, architecture or
> > distribution can do whatever they want behind the interface. It's just an
> > "the higher the value, the higher the performance, the higher the power
> > consumption". And that's generally true.
> Right, but what are you changing? Limiting the maximum frequency to
> anything other than the hardware maximum wastes power (and prevents you
> from getting at Intel's dynamic acceleration stuff). Changing the
> governor to anything other than ondemand wastes power. With enough
> understanding of the workload, you could play with the threshold values
> - but that also requires knowledge of the hardware, and so making that
> decision requires exposing enough information to the application that a
> simple 0-100 scale doesn't make any sense.
No, if you have this information beforehand, you can something
special-trained behind the interface.
> Really. You can't provide any useful interface to the hardware in this
But discussion stops here. If we like to, we will provide code for a
org.freedesktop.DeviceKit.Power.CPUFreq. You're not the consumer of any of
those interfaces. The corresponding maintainers will be notified, so they
just can "take it or hate it".
More information about the hal