Your message dated Sat, 30 Apr 2005 16:06:51 -0600
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
has caused the Debian Bug report #306530,
regarding powernowd: stuck at lower freq
to be marked as having been forwarded to the upstream software
author(s) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 306530-forwarded) by bugs.debian.org; 30 Apr 2005 22:06:57 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Apr 30 15:06:57 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from winfree.gag.com [192.133.104.8]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1DS06z-00038l-00; Sat, 30 Apr 2005 15:06:57 -0700
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by winfree.gag.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A6A6C063;
Sat, 30 Apr 2005 16:06:56 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from winfree.gag.com ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (winfree [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 25153-08; Sat, 30 Apr 2005 16:06:54 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from rover.gag.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by winfree.gag.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58658C1A6;
Sat, 30 Apr 2005 16:06:54 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by rover.gag.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id A8F4CE6B35; Sat, 30 Apr 2005 16:06:51 -0600 (MDT)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], "B. Zhang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bug#306530: powernowd: the same bug ...
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Bdale Garbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 16:06:51 -0600
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (B. Zhang's
message of "Sat, 30 Apr 2005 09:30:44 +0200")
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at gag.com
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level:
"B. Zhang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 18:00 -0600, Bdale Garbee wrote:
>> The complaint about not being able to open the file is "normal" on a system
>> that doesn't have scaling_available_frequencies.
> The version 0.90 worked fine for me, why ?
This part of the code changed between 0.90 and 0.95, and I suspect the upstream
author doesn't have a powerpc system to test on. I actually have two powerpc
systems, but both are collecting dust right now, and I'm not sure the CPU
variants in them are close enough to yours for them to help diagnose this...
> cpu0: 599Mhz - 1199Mhz (1 steps)
> step1 : 599Mhz
Ok, the problem is obvious, even if the cause isn't immediately clear. When
it says "1 steps", that means it has built a table of possible processor
speeds that only has one entry. I would think it should have at least 2, even
if the only option provided by the CPU is full or half speed.
> The speed doesn't jump to 1199Mhz. But with version 0.90, it did.
> I have a apple iBook G4 1.2Ghz.
I've read through the get_per_cpu_info() function and don't see immediately
how this could be happening, so I think it's time to add the upstream author
to this discussion. John, see bugs.debian.org/306530 for the complete thread.
Bdale
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
