Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1367645 > unrolled thread

Re: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high even if in idle

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high  even if in idle Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> - 2016-03-31 00:20 +0200
    Re: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high  even if in idle "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> - 2016-03-31 00:30 +0200
      Re: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high  even if in idle Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> - 2016-03-31 00:50 +0200
        Re: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high  even if in idle "Pandruvada, Srinivas" <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com> - 2016-03-31 01:20 +0200
          Re: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high  even if in idle "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> - 2016-03-31 01:30 +0200
            Re: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high  even if in idle Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 01:40 +0200
              Re: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high  even if in idle "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> - 2016-03-31 01:50 +0200
                Re: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high  even if in idle "Navin P.S" <navinp1912@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 09:30 +0200
    RE: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high even if in idle "Doug Smythies" <dsmythies@telus.net> - 2016-03-31 01:00 +0200
      Re: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high  even if in idle Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> - 2016-03-31 01:20 +0200
      Re: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high  even if in idle Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 10:20 +0200
        RE: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high even if in idle "Doug Smythies" <dsmythies@telus.net> - 2016-03-31 16:40 +0200
          Re: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high  even if in idle Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 08:20 +0200
            Re: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high  even if in idle Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> - 2016-04-02 17:40 +0200

#1367645 — Re: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high even if in idle

On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I am using Intel-PState-Driver here with v4.6-rc1 and Intel-
> SandyBridge-CPU.
> 
> Here are my turbostat results attached.
> 
> $ cd $BUILD_DIR
> $ LC_ALL=C make -C tools/ turbostat
> 
> $ sudo ./turbostat -i 1 --msr=0x199 --debug --out
> /tmp/turbostat-i-1-msr-0x199-debug.txt
> 
> Will try <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8702071/>.
> 
> Please see attached files.
> 
Thanks. Your logs make sense. You have config set to performance mode
by default (Which I believe default in all kernel Ubuntu). So as
expected Intel P state was asking for max. So there is no issue here.

I would expect the same in Jorg's platform. But he has a haswell which
has a special feature called config TDP. So he is effectively running
in powersave mode, his platform may be forcing to lower TDP.

So Jorg, can you send the turbostate also with the above debug option.
Also

rdmsr 0xce
rdmsr 0x1ad
rdmsr 0x648
rdmsr 0x649
rdmsr 0x64A
rdmsr 0x64b
rdmsr 0x64c

Thanks,
Srinivas

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1367650

On 3/31/2016 12:18 AM, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am using Intel-PState-Driver here with v4.6-rc1 and Intel-
>> SandyBridge-CPU.
>>
>> Here are my turbostat results attached.
>>
>> $ cd $BUILD_DIR
>> $ LC_ALL=C make -C tools/ turbostat
>>
>> $ sudo ./turbostat -i 1 --msr=0x199 --debug --out
>> /tmp/turbostat-i-1-msr-0x199-debug.txt
>>
>> Will try <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8702071/>.
>>
>> Please see attached files.
>>
> Thanks. Your logs make sense. You have config set to performance mode
> by default (Which I believe default in all kernel Ubuntu). So as
> expected Intel P state was asking for max. So there is no issue here.

But the behavior is different from what it used to be, isn't it?

So there seems to be a problem here AFAICS.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1367654

On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 00:25 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On 3/31/2016 12:18 AM, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > I am using Intel-PState-Driver here with v4.6-rc1 and Intel-
> > > SandyBridge-CPU.
> > > 
> > > Here are my turbostat results attached.
> > > 
> > > $ cd $BUILD_DIR
> > > $ LC_ALL=C make -C tools/ turbostat
> > > 
> > > $ sudo ./turbostat -i 1 --msr=0x199 --debug --out
> > > /tmp/turbostat-i-1-msr-0x199-debug.txt
> > > 
> > > Will try <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8702071/>.
> > > 
> > > Please see attached files.
> > > 
> > Thanks. Your logs make sense. You have config set to performance
> > mode
> > by default (Which I believe default in all kernel Ubuntu). So as
> > expected Intel P state was asking for max. So there is no issue
> > here.
> But the behavior is different from what it used to be, isn't it?
> 
There are two turbostat output files, In both I see we are requesting
max (0x1700) in performance mode. This CPU is Sandybridge, so no config
TDP here, the other problem system reported is Haswell
.
 0       1       3    0.15    2017    1596  0x00001700 

I am not sure whether Sedat is saying that he has the same issue as
Jorg. I think Sedat will see the same turbostat output if he ran 4.5.

Sedat, 
Please confirm whether you see difference between 4.5 and 4.6-rc1.

Thanks,
Srinivas

> So there seems to be a problem here AFAICS.
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm"
> in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1367662

On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 15:46 -0700, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 00:25 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > 
> > On 3/31/2016 12:18 AM, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > I am using Intel-PState-Driver here with v4.6-rc1 and Intel-
> > > > SandyBridge-CPU.
> > > > 
> > > > Here are my turbostat results attached.
> > > > 
> > > > $ cd $BUILD_DIR
> > > > $ LC_ALL=C make -C tools/ turbostat
> > > > 
> > > > $ sudo ./turbostat -i 1 --msr=0x199 --debug --out
> > > > /tmp/turbostat-i-1-msr-0x199-debug.txt
> > > > 
> > > > Will try <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8702071/>.
> > > > 
> > > > Please see attached files.
> > > > 
> > > Thanks. Your logs make sense. You have config set to performance
> > > mode
> > > by default (Which I believe default in all kernel Ubuntu). So as
> > > expected Intel P state was asking for max. So there is no issue
> > > here.
> > But the behavior is different from what it used to be, isn't it?
> > 
> There are two turbostat output files, In both I see we are requesting
> max (0x1700) in performance mode. This CPU is Sandybridge, so no
> config
> TDP here, the other problem system reported is Haswell
> .
>  0       1       3    0.15    2017    1596  0x00001700 
> 
> I am not sure whether Sedat is saying that he has the same issue as
> Jorg. I think Sedat will see the same turbostat output if he ran 4.5.
> 
I takeback my statements. It will depend on when he ran turbostat, is
it within a minute or so. As doug suggested, ubuntu changes the mode to
powersave, then we shouldn't see 0x1700 in MSR 0x199.
Sedat,
What is the output of 
cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu?/cpufreq/scaling_governor 

Thanks,
Srinivas

> Sedat, 
> Please confirm whether you see difference between 4.5 and 4.6-rc1.
> 
> Thanks,
> Srinivas
> 
> > 
> > So there seems to be a problem here AFAICS.
> > 
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm"
> > in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm"
> in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1367665

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:25 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Pandruvada, Srinivas
> <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 15:46 -0700, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 00:25 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On 3/31/2016 12:18 AM, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Hi,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > I am using Intel-PState-Driver here with v4.6-rc1 and Intel-
>>> > > > SandyBridge-CPU.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Here are my turbostat results attached.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > $ cd $BUILD_DIR
>>> > > > $ LC_ALL=C make -C tools/ turbostat
>>> > > >
>>> > > > $ sudo ./turbostat -i 1 --msr=0x199 --debug --out
>>> > > > /tmp/turbostat-i-1-msr-0x199-debug.txt
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Will try <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8702071/>.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Please see attached files.
>>> > > >
>>> > > Thanks. Your logs make sense. You have config set to performance
>>> > > mode
>>> > > by default (Which I believe default in all kernel Ubuntu). So as
>>> > > expected Intel P state was asking for max. So there is no issue
>>> > > here.
>>> > But the behavior is different from what it used to be, isn't it?
>>> >

[cut]

>
> Too much questions.

OK

> I switched to CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_POWERSAVE=y and tested with
> the simplified revert-patch of Rafael.

Why do you need the revert patch in the first place?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1367670

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:28 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:25 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Pandruvada, Srinivas
>> <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 15:46 -0700, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 00:25 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > On 3/31/2016 12:18 AM, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Hi,
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > I am using Intel-PState-Driver here with v4.6-rc1 and Intel-
>>>> > > > SandyBridge-CPU.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Here are my turbostat results attached.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > $ cd $BUILD_DIR
>>>> > > > $ LC_ALL=C make -C tools/ turbostat
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > $ sudo ./turbostat -i 1 --msr=0x199 --debug --out
>>>> > > > /tmp/turbostat-i-1-msr-0x199-debug.txt
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Will try <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8702071/>.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Please see attached files.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > Thanks. Your logs make sense. You have config set to performance
>>>> > > mode
>>>> > > by default (Which I believe default in all kernel Ubuntu). So as
>>>> > > expected Intel P state was asking for max. So there is no issue
>>>> > > here.
>>>> > But the behavior is different from what it used to be, isn't it?
>>>> >
>
> [cut]
>
>>
>> Too much questions.
>
> OK
>
>> I switched to CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_POWERSAVE=y and tested with
>> the simplified revert-patch of Rafael.
>
> Why do you need the revert patch in the first place?

I simply wanted to test CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_POWERSAVE=y and
keep the rest.

- Sedat -

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1367672

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:32 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:28 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:25 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Pandruvada, Srinivas
>>> <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 15:46 -0700, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 00:25 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On 3/31/2016 12:18 AM, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > Hi,
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > I am using Intel-PState-Driver here with v4.6-rc1 and Intel-
>>>>> > > > SandyBridge-CPU.
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > Here are my turbostat results attached.
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > $ cd $BUILD_DIR
>>>>> > > > $ LC_ALL=C make -C tools/ turbostat
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > $ sudo ./turbostat -i 1 --msr=0x199 --debug --out
>>>>> > > > /tmp/turbostat-i-1-msr-0x199-debug.txt
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > Will try <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8702071/>.
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > Please see attached files.
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > Thanks. Your logs make sense. You have config set to performance
>>>>> > > mode
>>>>> > > by default (Which I believe default in all kernel Ubuntu). So as
>>>>> > > expected Intel P state was asking for max. So there is no issue
>>>>> > > here.
>>>>> > But the behavior is different from what it used to be, isn't it?
>>>>> >
>>
>> [cut]
>>
>>>
>>> Too much questions.
>>
>> OK
>>
>>> I switched to CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_POWERSAVE=y and tested with
>>> the simplified revert-patch of Rafael.
>>
>> Why do you need the revert patch in the first place?
>
> I simply wanted to test CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_POWERSAVE=y and
> keep the rest.

But it is not clear to us whether or not your system has regressed
with respect to 4.5, which is the whole point of this thread.  Do you
see a regression here?

Jörg in particular is saying that he sees the problem with both
performance and powersave settings.  What about you?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1367903

>
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016, 5:12 AM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:32 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:28 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:25 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Pandruvada, Srinivas
>> >>> <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com> wrote:
>> >>>> On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 15:46 -0700, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
>> >>>>> On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 00:25 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > On 3/31/2016 12:18 AM, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
>> >>>>> > >
>> >>>>> > >
>> >>>>> > > On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> >>>>> > > >
>> >>>>> > > >
>> >>>>> > > > Hi,
>> >>>>> > > >
>> >>>>> > > > (snipped)
>>
>> But it is not clear to us whether or not your system has regressed
>> with respect to 4.5, which is the whole point of this thread.  Do you
>> see a regression here?
>>
>> Jörg in particular is saying that he sees the problem with both
>> performance and powersave settings.  What about you?

Resend.


 https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=114741

I was looking through ubsan and found this relevant.Hp envy runs on
x64 but the bug seems to mention (ia64).

 I see two versions rdmsrl and rdmsrl_safe.
These values are filled by rdmsrl .Does changing to safe function help .

 Can an exception ever happen in case of  MSR_IA32_APERF ?

Those values certainly cannot be negative and so huge.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1367658 — RE: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high even if in idle

On 2106.03.30 15:19 Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
>> 
>> Please see attached files.
>> 
> Thanks. Your logs make sense. You have config set to performance mode
> by default (Which I believe default in all kernel Ubuntu).

Yes, but via a startup script, by default Ubuntu sets the governor
to powersave 1 minute after boot (or ondemand if acpi-cpufreq).

> So as
> expected Intel P state was asking for max. So there is no issue here.

Yes, your point is valid, as this does not appear to be a Ubuntu kernel
configuration file, as the size is not correct.

Should be:
-rw-r--r--  1 doug doug 194436 Mar 26 18:59 ../temp-k-git/linux/.config-4.6.0-040600rc1-generic
Is:
-rw-r--r-- 1 doug doug 134944 Mar 30 15:21 config-4.6.0-rc1-11-iniza-small

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1367661

On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 15:50 -0700, Doug Smythies wrote:
> On 2106.03.30 15:19 Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Please see attached files.
> > > 
> > Thanks. Your logs make sense. You have config set to performance
> > mode
> > by default (Which I believe default in all kernel Ubuntu).
> Yes, but via a startup script, by default Ubuntu sets the governor
> to powersave 1 minute after boot (or ondemand if acpi-cpufreq).
> 
You are correct. So after a minute it changes to powersave by some
script.

Thanks,
Srinivas

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1367955

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 12:50 AM, Doug Smythies <dsmythies@telus.net> wrote:
> On 2106.03.30 15:19 Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
>>>
>>> Please see attached files.
>>>
>> Thanks. Your logs make sense. You have config set to performance mode
>> by default (Which I believe default in all kernel Ubuntu).
>
> Yes, but via a startup script, by default Ubuntu sets the governor
> to powersave 1 minute after boot (or ondemand if acpi-cpufreq).
>

Can you give more and precise informations on this?
script-name etc.

>> So as
>> expected Intel P state was asking for max. So there is no issue here.
>
> Yes, your point is valid, as this does not appear to be a Ubuntu kernel
> configuration file, as the size is not correct.
>
> Should be:
> -rw-r--r--  1 doug doug 194436 Mar 26 18:59 ../temp-k-git/linux/.config-4.6.0-040600rc1-generic
> Is:
> -rw-r--r-- 1 doug doug 134944 Mar 30 15:21 config-4.6.0-rc1-11-iniza-small
>

Yes, this is the config of my customized Linux-kernel based on Ubuntu
"generic" flavour (details see attached file).

- Sedat -

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1368368 — RE: [intel-pstate driver regression] processor frequency very high even if in idle

On 2016.03.31 01:11 Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 12:50 AM, Doug Smythies <dsmythies@telus.net> wrote:
>> On 2106.03.30 15:19 Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Please see attached files.
>>>>
>>> Thanks. Your logs make sense. You have config set to performance mode
>>> by default (Which I believe default in all kernel Ubuntu).
>>
>> Yes, but via a startup script, by default Ubuntu sets the governor
>> to powersave 1 minute after boot (or ondemand if acpi-cpufreq).
>>
>
> Can you give more and precise informations on this?
> script-name etc.

The script is /etc/init.d/ondemand
It sleeps for 1 minute and then sets the scaling
governor, based on availability, in the following order:
interactive
ondemand
powersave

See also:

$ ls -l /etc/rc?.d/S06ondemand
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Mar  8 09:51 /etc/rc2.d/S06ondemand -> ../init.d/ondemand
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Mar  8 09:51 /etc/rc3.d/S06ondemand -> ../init.d/ondemand
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Mar  8 09:51 /etc/rc4.d/S06ondemand -> ../init.d/ondemand
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Mar  8 09:51 /etc/rc5.d/S06ondemand -> ../init.d/ondemand

From your other e-mail:

> is somehow showing higher
> values than TSC_MHz.
> Not sure if this really make sense if TSC_MHz is a max-value (which I
> don't know it is).

That is normal, and is turbo mode. Example:

$ sudo turbostat -i 3 --msr=0x199
     CPU Avg_MHz   %Busy Bzy_MHz TSC_MHz   MSR 0x199
       -     478   12.53    3798    3413  0x00000000
       0       3    0.09    3595    3413  0x00002500
       4       1    0.03    3568    3413  0x00001000
       1       4    0.11    3649    3413  0x00001200
       5       2    0.07    3592    3413  0x00001000
       2       3    0.08    3628    3413  0x00001000
       6       1    0.03    3546    3413  0x00001000
       3       1    0.02    3733    3413  0x00001000
       7    3808   99.91    3799    3411  0x00002600

... Doug

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1369875

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 4:30 PM, Doug Smythies <dsmythies@telus.net> wrote:
> On 2016.03.31 01:11 Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 12:50 AM, Doug Smythies <dsmythies@telus.net> wrote:
>>> On 2106.03.30 15:19 Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Please see attached files.
>>>>>
>>>> Thanks. Your logs make sense. You have config set to performance mode
>>>> by default (Which I believe default in all kernel Ubuntu).
>>>
>>> Yes, but via a startup script, by default Ubuntu sets the governor
>>> to powersave 1 minute after boot (or ondemand if acpi-cpufreq).
>>>
>>
>> Can you give more and precise informations on this?
>> script-name etc.
>
> The script is /etc/init.d/ondemand
> It sleeps for 1 minute and then sets the scaling
> governor, based on availability, in the following order:
> interactive
> ondemand
> powersave
>

Thanks for these informations.

$ dpkg -S /etc/init.d/ondemand
initscripts: /etc/init.d/ondemand

For the followers...

[ /etc/init.d/ondemand ]

#! /bin/sh
### BEGIN INIT INFO
# Provides:          ondemand
# Required-Start:    $remote_fs $all
# Required-Stop:
# Default-Start:     2 3 4 5
# Default-Stop:
# Short-Description: Set the CPU Frequency Scaling governor to "ondemand"
### END INIT INFO


PATH=/sbin:/usr/sbin:/bin:/usr/bin

. /lib/init/vars.sh
. /lib/lsb/init-functions

case "$1" in
    start)
        start-stop-daemon --start --background --exec
/etc/init.d/ondemand -- background
        ;;
    background)
        sleep 60 # probably enough time for desktop login

        for CPUFREQ in /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_governor
        do
                [ -f $CPUFREQ ] || continue
                echo -n ondemand > $CPUFREQ
        done
        ;;
    restart|reload|force-reload)
        echo "Error: argument '$1' not supported" >&2
        exit 3
        ;;
    stop)
        ;;
    *)
        echo "Usage: $0 start|stop" >&2
        exit 3
        ;;
esac

[ /etc/init.d/ondemand ]

Will check...

$ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_governor

> See also:
>
> $ ls -l /etc/rc?.d/S06ondemand
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Mar  8 09:51 /etc/rc2.d/S06ondemand -> ../init.d/ondemand
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Mar  8 09:51 /etc/rc3.d/S06ondemand -> ../init.d/ondemand
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Mar  8 09:51 /etc/rc4.d/S06ondemand -> ../init.d/ondemand
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Mar  8 09:51 /etc/rc5.d/S06ondemand -> ../init.d/ondemand
>

Here it is S99...

$ LC_ALL=C ls -l /etc/rc?.d/S*ondemand
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Mar 27  2012 /etc/rc2.d/S99ondemand ->
../init.d/ondemand
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Mar 27  2012 /etc/rc3.d/S99ondemand ->
../init.d/ondemand
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Mar 27  2012 /etc/rc4.d/S99ondemand ->
../init.d/ondemand
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Mar 27  2012 /etc/rc5.d/S99ondemand ->
../init.d/ondemand

> From your other e-mail:
>
>> is somehow showing higher
>> values than TSC_MHz.
>> Not sure if this really make sense if TSC_MHz is a max-value (which I
>> don't know it is).
>
> That is normal, and is turbo mode. Example:
>
> $ sudo turbostat -i 3 --msr=0x199
>      CPU Avg_MHz   %Busy Bzy_MHz TSC_MHz   MSR 0x199
>        -     478   12.53    3798    3413  0x00000000
>        0       3    0.09    3595    3413  0x00002500
>        4       1    0.03    3568    3413  0x00001000
>        1       4    0.11    3649    3413  0x00001200
>        5       2    0.07    3592    3413  0x00001000
>        2       3    0.08    3628    3413  0x00001000
>        6       1    0.03    3546    3413  0x00001000
>        3       1    0.02    3733    3413  0x00001000
>        7    3808   99.91    3799    3411  0x00002600
>

Ah, OK.

Thanks again.
That helped me.

I am trying CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE=y from
linux-pm.git#linux-next out of curiosity...

$ ./scripts/diffconfig /boot/config-$(uname -r) .config
 CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE y -> n
+CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_SCHEDUTIL y
+CPU_FREQ_GOV_ATTR_SET y
+CPU_FREQ_GOV_SCHEDUTIL y

...will report.

- sed@ -

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curiosity_killed_the_cat

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1369968

On Sat, 2016-04-02 at 08:30 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> > I am trying CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE=y from
> > linux-pm.git#linux-next out of curiosity...
> > 
> > $ ./scripts/diffconfig /boot/config-$(uname -r) .config
> >  CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE y -> n
> > +CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_SCHEDUTIL y
> > +CPU_FREQ_GOV_ATTR_SET y
> > +CPU_FREQ_GOV_SCHEDUTIL y
> > 
> > ...will report.
> > 
> 
> Not sure why I see here "powersave".
> Does Intel-PState driver not support CPU_FREQ_GOV_SCHEDUTIL?
> 
> $ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_driver
> intel_pstate
> intel_pstate
> intel_pstate
> intel_pstate
> 
> $ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> powersave
> powersave
> powersave
> powersave

If you are using Ubuntu, the OS has a script which will automatically
change from performance.
Doug can give more information on this script.

Thanks,
Srinivas



> 
> See also attached files.
> 
> - sed@ -

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web