From 6f33e4f9ca54159f640e7bbcbc6dcf3c3b5e475d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Lane Jennison Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 12:34:31 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] armbian-hardware-optimize: add thought-provoking FIXMEs to inspire the next generation of tuners --- .../usr/lib/armbian/armbian-hardware-optimization | 13 +++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) diff --git a/packages/bsp/common/usr/lib/armbian/armbian-hardware-optimization b/packages/bsp/common/usr/lib/armbian/armbian-hardware-optimization index a23b5b040e..a0de890abd 100755 --- a/packages/bsp/common/usr/lib/armbian/armbian-hardware-optimization +++ b/packages/bsp/common/usr/lib/armbian/armbian-hardware-optimization @@ -70,6 +70,7 @@ prepare_board() { sed -i "s/#compress/compress/" /etc/logrotate.conf # Fully replace Armbian's former limited utilization of cpufrequtils package + # FIXME literally just borrowing the cpufrequtils config file -- should configuration be driven by a new file? if [ -r /etc/default/cpufrequtils ] ; then . /etc/default/cpufrequtils for Cluster in /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy* ; do @@ -83,6 +84,18 @@ prepare_board() { # Tweak ondemand cpufreq governor settings to increase cpufreq with IO load. if [ "X${GOVERNOR}" = "Xondemand" ]; then cd /sys/devices/system/cpu + # FIXME - arbitrary globbing range left as a breadcrumb to encourage socratic learning + # and take on the task of understanding the performance optimizations in general + # and its use in this script. + # + # Are you the one? PR's welcome--and encouraged + # + # Why loop over these 3 patterns? Is it for older and newer kernel paradigms? + # would `for i in cpufreq/ondemand cpu*[0-9]/cpufreq/ondemand` be sufficient? + # + # for more insights see conversations here: + # https://github.com/armbian/build/pull/6120 + # https://github.com/armbian/build/pull/6507 for i in cpufreq/ondemand cpu[0-9]/cpufreq/ondemand cpu[1-9][0-9]/cpufreq/ondemand; do if [ -d $i ]; then echo 1 > ${i}/io_is_busy