-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 PGNet Dev wrote:
jeff,
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 10:16 PM, Jeff Mahoney<jeffm@suse.com> wrote:
the problem exists with any/all speeds above the 'stock' 2.8 GHz .... if, given the responses above and below you're actually interested in more data, i can provide coremark benchmarks in both cases showing virtually identical results in both cases. i.e., despite the OS's report that the cpu speed is "2.8GHz", it's actually still at the BIOS-reported 3.7 GHZ. Yes, that's what I consider to be the bug here. If it's running at 3.7 GHz and performing at 3.7 GHz, that's important. (1) Asus' "Cool n Quiet" OFF, CPU OC'd to 3.7 GHz, OS reports 3.7 GHz (2) Asus' "Cool n Quiet" ON, CPU OC'd to 3.7 GHz, OS reports 2.8 GHz (3) Asus' "Cool n Quiet" ON, CPU @ stock 2.8 GHz, OS reports 2.8 GHz
Huh, so CnQ might be the problem here. I'm not a CPU expert so I can't really say why that would be. Jan responded in another post that the ACPI tables might not be able to report it - but then we have the non-CnQ number reporting accurately.
Overclocking is a sensitive topic. It can introduce stability problems that are reported as normal bugs when they are most definitely not. After you see a bunch of them, it's easy to get a little jumpy. Don't take it personally.
I appreciate your candor. But to be honest, nothing WAS reported as a bug here. I asked succinctly and politely *here*, on the community list, if it is, or is not. Before filing a bug. For _exactly_ the purpose of NOT reporting a bug if it is not.
My view is that the misreporting is a bug, but anything you do with it isn't.
As for taking it personally -- sorry, I do take rudeness personally. Don't you?
A stable email address doesn't mean you're not anonymous. Communities are built on trust. In the kernel community, we sign off code patches with our names and email addresses. I don't think it's too much to ask for reporters to do the same. If you're not submitting code, I don't care if you use a pseudonym. I want to be able to be able to say "Hi" at the beginning of an email and have it be an actual name. If you do submit code and use a pseudonym then you're definitely not part of the community.
(1) i've submitted dozens of bugs, using my email address above -- with which i'm registered at Novell -- and have stuck around to work through them with the developers. on list, on bugzilla, on irc, on phone, and face to face. iirc, you have responded to at least a couple of them. (2) as for wanting to "say hi" at the beginning of an email, fine. apart from the fact that you and i have _personally_ exchanged email off list a number of times -- what you _want_ deserves no more or less weight than what i want, which is to manage my communication in a way that works for me. neither case justifies 'jumpy' or 'rude'.
You're absolutely right that you have the right to manage your communication the way you want. I still don't think Greg was being rude when he said it was unsupported, though. Terse, maybe, but not rude.
(3) where have i submitted any code?
That's not what I was saying, but it could come across that way. I meant that it's fine to use a pseudonym if you're never planning on submitting code.
(4) if you're going to "ask (or require) *reporters*" to only use their names in/on public forums, then you might actually announce that as policy somewhere, enforce it @Novell/Suse forums, lists, bugizlla, etc and try to do that before making presumptions.
I'm not. It's not an official policy, it's my opinion. I might have expressed it a little too strongly.
so overclocking of any kind in UNsupported by *suse and will be ignored? that'll be news to quite a few folks, i'd presume ... If you're operating outside of parameters that the hardware vendors define, absolutely!
if you choose not to support ANY overclocking of ANY hardware because it's not the "official" spec, well ... kind of makes you wonder what AMD annd ASUS are thinking actually building hardware & software to make overclocking beyond 'stock', out of the box params possible.
not worth the argument to me.
i politely asked a question. and diligently offered what info i could. if you don't want to hear it -- fine. your product's loss, ultimately.
AMD and ASUS offer those products because users are looking to push the envelope and _will pay for them_. They're in the business of selling hardware and there's a market for it. Sometimes it works due to higher quality processors being released at a certain frequency and sometimes it introduces massive instability. As part of the community which is responsible for triaging and fixing bugs, Greg and I are concerned that overclocking just introduces one more variable that is totally outside software control. It's no different than our refusal to support binary-only modules. Either of them can introduce subtle or not so subtle corruptions that lead to crashes in otherwise stable software. - -Jeff - -- Jeff Mahoney SUSE Labs -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkp29OsACgkQLPWxlyuTD7Ji+ACgmMe9yxtQrgXf7hyY8jlUZwV5 hQcAoIYSsrilNBiJCnVCqD06iOsnioaT =wEKO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+help@opensuse.org