![]() |
2010-04-23
, 15:29
|
Posts: 992 |
Thanked: 995 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ California
|
#3272
|
![]() |
2010-04-23
, 16:01
|
Posts: 59 |
Thanked: 7 times |
Joined on Jan 2010
|
#3273
|
![]() |
2010-04-23
, 16:19
|
|
Posts: 168 |
Thanked: 206 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
@ Finland
|
#3274
|
This is very interesting, it looks like you may have advantage because you minimize switching in idle periods! (only 2 frequencies and no chance to have something beyond 500MHz during idle periods. 125MHz actually is too small and ondemand cpufrequency governor switches to 500MHz each time then there is a load.)
![]() |
2010-04-23
, 16:58
|
Posts: 1,751 |
Thanked: 844 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
@ Sweden
|
#3275
|
First of all, this is my first post in here and I have read most of this thread and I wan to thank everybody who provided all this information. And especially to people who are testing and producing all of this overclocking information.
I just got my N900 this week and I am very happy with it. First I overclocked with Letho's custom 125-900 kernel and It has been running with no problem. After reading about the power saving voltages of Titan's kernel, I decided to give it a try. So I reflashed to the stock kernel.Then I followed the Wiki with instructions, first I installed kernel-power settings and rootsh, then I checked with
uname -r
and returned with "2.6.28.10power-omap1" (so assuming that everything installed fine)
Then I did
sudo gainroot
to gain the control and then I entered
/usr/sbin/kernel-load /usr/share/kernel-power-settings/ideal
to flash the kernel, but it comes back and says ": not found".
Please guide me to right direction; I am new with linux commands and not sure what to do next. Thanks..
apt-get install kernel-power-flasher kernel-power-settings
![]() |
2010-04-23
, 17:28
|
Posts: 992 |
Thanked: 995 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ California
|
#3276
|
![]() |
2010-04-23
, 17:48
|
Posts: 451 |
Thanked: 334 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
|
#3277
|
Create user -file in /etc/sudoers.d/ and add following to it.
and run update-sudoers -command.Code:user ALL = (ALL) NOPASSWD: ALL root ALL = (ALL) NOPASSWD: ALL
user ALL = NOPASSWD: /usr/sbin/kernel-load
# update-sudoers
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to 白い熊 For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2010-04-23
, 17:52
|
|
Posts: 844 |
Thanked: 521 times |
Joined on Jan 2009
@ UK southampton
|
#3278
|
Don't do this!!!
You can get seriously messed up. The N900 runs all processes as user, and this way any script etc on your phone can completely destroy your system.
Rather, create the file /etc/sudoers.d/kernel-load.sh with this text:
and then runCode:user ALL = NOPASSWD: /usr/sbin/kernel-load
Code:# update-sudoers
The Following User Says Thank You to casper27 For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2010-04-23
, 19:02
|
Posts: 126 |
Thanked: 327 times |
Joined on Nov 2009
@ Finland
|
#3279
|
![]() |
2010-04-23
, 19:06
|
Posts: 451 |
Thanked: 334 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
|
#3280
|
![]() |
|
But this depends from multiple factors and if it could be found, for exam, that in proper handling CPU spends less energy with high frequency (just because it runs faster and energy increase is proportionally less) then some things become simpler. Don't forget, somebody can't overclock because CPU instability danger but they want a faster N900 too.
One example - switching between CPU frequencies takes time and frequent switching actually steals CPU performance. The CPU switching itself takes around 30nsec but it looks like some equipment needs to be put on sleep and restored during switch process. So, many frequencies may also steal your CPU performance.
But put all hopes on OC for N900 performance may be not very good, somebody (like me) hesitates OC especially with undervoltage because CPU may be unstable. At least a small research is needed to be sure that it wouldn't corrupt valuable N900 data.
However, the OC experiments are good - nightfire reports that he routinely runs N900 on 500MHz and has 24h-48h usage on moderate work. It is a good sign and it advised me to look into performance vs energy ratio with more attention. Based on my Intel X86 experience I didn't expect that CPU on high frequency may consume power in less proportion than CPU performance increase.
Last edited by egoshin; 2010-04-23 at 15:31.