Re: running the kernel without hal= how safe with the cpufreq

[Justin Mattock <justinmattock@gmail.com>]

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