[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: kapm-idled

On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 07:54:19PM +0000 Tom Breza wrote:


>> Yes and you should have recognized that there are no negative side effects
>> of kapm-idled it does _not_ consume CPU Power which would be needed
>> otherwise.

>> Test it while encoding videos or something else which should consume all
>> CPU-power by itself.

>> So you could say it is a cosmetical bug, but not more.

> hmmmm maybe is stupid question but ...
> if mashine is going in to suspend mode then system shoud slow down
> procesor speed

Not many processors are able to do that.
The Crusoe does it perfect, but Intel Speed Step processors only are able to
reduce the speed in one single step IIRC. AFAIK AMDs processor are not able
to do that yet.

All processors from Intel and AMD since the Pentium 75-S are able to do a
hlt-command which shut's them virtually off until the next interrupt occurs.
That saves some power.

> and swith off all device wich can be off, if procesor is running allmost on
> full power then needs more power? is that right? 

When your CPU is idle it does not consume as much power as when it is
heavily working if it is that what you meant.

> then means that for me if procesor is loaded in full need more power =
> shorter battery work?

But you should, what was my point, not include kapm-idled in that assumption
because that makes your computer save battery power.


  friendly greetings from Chelmsford/Britain

Playing now: Metallica - Sad But True

Reply to: