running the kernel without hal= how safe with the cpufreq

running the kernel without hal= how safe with the cpufreq

[Justin Mattock]

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

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

[Arjan van de Ven]

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

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

[Justin Mattock]

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