* running the kernel without hal= how safe with the cpufreq
@ 2009-05-23 18:29 Justin Mattock
2009-05-23 21:08 ` Arjan van de Ven
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Justin Mattock @ 2009-05-23 18:29 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List
I'm in the process of building a system
minus hal(since udev 142 explains itself
in the README),
Anyways I normally just have
"ondemand" compiled as the main
cpufreq module, and have no powermgnt or cpufreq
userspace tool except or was hal.
should I be concerned
without having hal due to things like this in
ps auxZ
/usr/libexec/hald-addon-macbookpro-backlight
/usr/libexec/hald-addon-cpufreq
will the kernel take charge of the cores
or do I need to find a userspace app
to keep them at a safe level?
--
Justin P. Mattock
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: running the kernel without hal= how safe with the cpufreq
2009-05-23 18:29 running the kernel without hal= how safe with the cpufreq Justin Mattock
@ 2009-05-23 21:08 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-05-23 21:49 ` Justin Mattock
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Arjan van de Ven @ 2009-05-23 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Justin Mattock; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Sat, 23 May 2009 11:29:29 -0700
Justin Mattock <justinmattock@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm in the process of building a system
> minus hal(since udev 142 explains itself
> in the README),
> Anyways I normally just have
> "ondemand" compiled as the main
> cpufreq module, and have no powermgnt or cpufreq
> userspace tool except or was hal.
> should I be concerned
> without having hal due to things like this in
> ps auxZ
if you use ondemand you don't need anything else; the defaults
are good and in fact very very few people (if anyone) should ever
change the tunables (they're more aimed for the ondemand developers).
Any application that touches these tunables is basically broken ;)
In addition, you should always be safe against hardware breaking,
as long as you don't do things like poke chipset registers to disable
SMM etc, there is thermal protection build into the system.
First it will automatically slow down the CPU (a lot), and if that is
not sufficient/fast enough, the system will shut down before it lets
itself be damaged.
--
Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: running the kernel without hal= how safe with the cpufreq
2009-05-23 21:08 ` Arjan van de Ven
@ 2009-05-23 21:49 ` Justin Mattock
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Justin Mattock @ 2009-05-23 21:49 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Arjan van de Ven; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 23 May 2009 11:29:29 -0700
> Justin Mattock <justinmattock@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm in the process of building a system
>> minus hal(since udev 142 explains itself
>> in the README),
>> Anyways I normally just have
>> "ondemand" compiled as the main
>> cpufreq module, and have no powermgnt or cpufreq
>> userspace tool except or was hal.
>> should I be concerned
>> without having hal due to things like this in
>> ps auxZ
>
> if you use ondemand you don't need anything else; the defaults
> are good and in fact very very few people (if anyone) should ever
> change the tunables (they're more aimed for the ondemand developers).
>
> Any application that touches these tunables is basically broken ;)
>
> In addition, you should always be safe against hardware breaking,
> as long as you don't do things like poke chipset registers to disable
> SMM etc, there is thermal protection build into the system.
> First it will automatically slow down the CPU (a lot), and if that is
> not sufficient/fast enough, the system will shut down before it lets
> itself be damaged.
>
>
>
> --
> Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
> For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
> visit http://www.lesswatts.org
>
cool,
alright then my system will have no
powerdaemon, just the kernel running
all of the powermgnt.
(with doing a simple watch cat /proc/cpuinfo)
I notice the cores will spike to full throttle
simultaneously and then lower to low
once a job is done) :^)
regards,
--
Justin P. Mattock
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-05-23 21:49 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-05-23 18:29 running the kernel without hal= how safe with the cpufreq Justin Mattock
2009-05-23 21:08 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-05-23 21:49 ` Justin Mattock
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).