Reply
Thread Tools
Posts: 669 | Thanked: 433 times | Joined on May 2010
#1
I noticed this strange and very annoying behavior - is it possible to tweak it?
 
peterleinchen's Avatar
Posts: 4,118 | Thanked: 8,901 times | Joined on Aug 2010 @ Ruhrgebiet, Germany
#2
Yes, of course it is.
React with dbus-settings to the end of call and reset lower limit to 250/500.

But it is not needed as this frequency is blocked in kernel settings and therefore not taken into account. Speaking about kernel-power.
__________________
SIM-Switcher, automated SIM switching with a Double (Dual) SIM adapter
--
Thank you all for voting me into the Community Council 2014-2016!

Please consider your membership / supporting Maemo e.V. and help to spread this by following/copying this link to your TMO signature:
[MC eV] Maemo Community eV membership application, http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=94257

editsignature, http://talk.maemo.org/profile.php?do=editsignature
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to peterleinchen For This Useful Post:
Posts: 669 | Thanked: 433 times | Joined on May 2010
#3
Originally Posted by peterleinchen View Post
Yes, of course it is.
React with dbus-settings to the end of call and reset lower limit to 250/500.

But it is not needed as this frequency is blocked in kernel settings and therefore not taken into account. Speaking about kernel-power.
125mhz is not blocked on my device - at the end of each call it is being re-set again - is it possible to block it?

i will use dbus if i'll have no other choice, but i'm looking for a "cleaner" solution
 
Posts: 2,292 | Thanked: 4,135 times | Joined on Apr 2010 @ UK
#4
Originally Posted by impeham View Post
125mhz is not blocked on my device - at the end of each call it is being re-set again - is it possible to block it?

i will use dbus if i'll have no other choice, but i'm looking for a "cleaner" solution
If you have Kernel Power, yes.

Code:
echo 125000 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ondemand/avoid_frequencies
This should do it, however AFAIK it should be blocked by default.
__________________

Wiki Admin
sixwheeledbeast's wiki
Testing Squad Subscriber
- mcallerx - tenminutecore - FlopSwap - Qnotted - zzztop - Bander - Fight2048 -


Before posting or starting a thread please try this.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to sixwheeledbeast For This Useful Post:
Posts: 1,100 | Thanked: 2,797 times | Joined on Apr 2011 @ Netherlands
#5
Originally Posted by sixwheeledbeast View Post
If you have Kernel Power, yes.

Code:
echo 125000 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ondemand/avoid_frequencies
This should do it, however AFAIK it should be blocked by default.
Peterleinchen is right, and you are right about the fact that it is blocked by default. But setting it as "frequency to be avoided" won't avoid lowering the min. freq back to 125 MHz due to a phone call.
But as it is blocked, your min freq will still be 250 MHz. For that, the new min. value of 125 MHz is bogus.

Code:
cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/stats/time_in_state
will tell you how much a certain frequency is used. If 125000 has a value of 0, it is never used.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ade For This Useful Post:
Posts: 2,292 | Thanked: 4,135 times | Joined on Apr 2010 @ UK
#6
Originally Posted by ade View Post
But setting it as "frequency to be avoided" won't avoid lowering the min. freq back to 125 MHz due to a phone call.
But as it is blocked, your min freq will still be 250 MHz. For that, the new min. value of 125 MHz is bogus.
Exactly, you explained it alot better
__________________

Wiki Admin
sixwheeledbeast's wiki
Testing Squad Subscriber
- mcallerx - tenminutecore - FlopSwap - Qnotted - zzztop - Bander - Fight2048 -


Before posting or starting a thread please try this.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to sixwheeledbeast For This Useful Post:
woody14619's Avatar
Posts: 1,455 | Thanked: 3,309 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Rochester, NY
#7
The only time I've seen anything do this was in early versions of speedpatch. If you're running and older version of that, do update it (or remove it). 125Mhz is unstable, and doesn't allow transition fast enough to handle all cases (missed calls, etc) which is why Nokia avoided using it in the first place.

Personally, I run 0/500/900 with a large step threshold and have no issues with low battery or lack in usability.
__________________
Maemo Council Member: May 2012 - November 2012
Hildon Foundation founding member.
Hildon Foundation Board of Directors: March 2013 - Jan 15, 2014
 
Posts: 2,292 | Thanked: 4,135 times | Joined on Apr 2010 @ UK
#8
"Correct Frequencies" can all depend on usage and the device, it's been covered lots of times before.

While I wouldn't recommend it to all, after long periods of testing different frequencies with my device and usage. I run 125-600 and have no issues with low battery or lack in usability. I have never experienced any issue with 125Mhz being unstable.

Bear in mind that since the "125Mhz unstable issue" was reported, smartreflex has been fixed and also there have been new releases of KP.

For reference this is the bugzilla link:-
https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7116
__________________

Wiki Admin
sixwheeledbeast's wiki
Testing Squad Subscriber
- mcallerx - tenminutecore - FlopSwap - Qnotted - zzztop - Bander - Fight2048 -


Before posting or starting a thread please try this.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to sixwheeledbeast For This Useful Post:
Posts: 669 | Thanked: 433 times | Joined on May 2010
#9
Originally Posted by sixwheeledbeast View Post
If you have Kernel Power, yes.

Code:
echo 125000 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ondemand/avoid_frequencies
This should do it, however AFAIK it should be blocked by default.
blocking this state is working - thanks, however, i thought it would be possible to completely avoid that cpu state change as a result of a phone call.

if no other choice, i guess i'll be executing my kernel power command to set a profile after each call end with dbus...
 
Posts: 1,808 | Thanked: 4,272 times | Joined on Feb 2011 @ Germany
#10
Originally Posted by impeham View Post
blocking this state is working - thanks, however, i thought it would be possible to completely avoid that cpu state change as a result of a phone call.
This is done by the dialer, which is closed source. I'd say it should be easily hackable, but why bother.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to reinob For This Useful Post:
Reply


 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:54.