Update on DeviceKit

Holger Macht 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 
> way.

You can.

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".

Regards,
	Holger


More information about the hal mailing list