ondemand cpufreq handler

[Arjan van de Ven]

Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
> "Kurt H Maier" <karmaflux at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Is there a reason why powertop always recommends ondemand?
>> Conservative is a much more sensible
>> The patch against 1.2 replaces the ondemand check with a check for conservative.
> 
> Both are acceptable, as is the powersave governor.  powertop should only
> complain if none of these three is in use.

actually you really should use ondemand, at least on Intel hardware. 
The others are just suboptimal.

> 
> The "suggests" facility is great for users, I'm very happy powertop
> has it.  But the implementation is a bit strained.  It'd be nice to
> refactor it and extend it a bit.  For example, it's not enough to have
> a good powersaving cpufreq governor available, you have to actually use
> it too.  ;-)

I'll look at your patch.. but I don't agree with the "any is good" 
thing.. because it just isn't ;)