On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 07:45:02PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 07:58:27AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 19:35:02 +0100
> > Chris Wilson wrote:
> >
> > > On SandyBridge IPS was entirely implemented in hardware and not reliant
> > > on the driver monit
On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 07:58:27AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 19:35:02 +0100
> Chris Wilson wrote:
>
> > On SandyBridge IPS was entirely implemented in hardware and not reliant
> > on the driver monitoring power consumption and feeding back desired run
> > states, so the har
On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 19:35:02 +0100
Chris Wilson wrote:
> On SandyBridge IPS was entirely implemented in hardware and not reliant
> on the driver monitoring power consumption and feeding back desired run
> states, so the hardware is able to adapt quicker and more flexibly. Which
> is a huge relief
On SandyBridge IPS was entirely implemented in hardware and not reliant
on the driver monitoring power consumption and feeding back desired run
states, so the hardware is able to adapt quicker and more flexibly. Which
is a huge relief for us as we no longer have to carry empirically
derived magic a
