From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
rui.zhang@intel.com, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: v4.8-rc1: thinkpad x60: running at low frequency even during kernel build
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 14:40:37 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161104091037.GD3414@vireshk-i7> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161104085830.GA4089@amd>
Hi Pavel,
I am really confused about where the problem is. 4.8 or 4.9 ? :)
On 04-11-16, 09:58, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Fri 2016-11-04 09:38:49, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I'm debugging overheats on v4.9-rc1... which did not seem to happen in
> > v4.8-rc1. I'm running basically "nice make -j 3" on kernel... cpus are
> > fully loaded.
> >
> > %Cpu(s): 7.5 us, 18.5 sy, 72.6 ni, 0.0 id, 0.0 wa, 0.0 hi, 1.5
> > si, 0.0 st
> > KiB Mem: 3087096 total, 2993076 used, 94020 free, 52900
> > buffers
> > KiB Swap: 1681428 total, 60900 used, 1620528 free. 1183664
> > cached Mem
> >
> > Still, cpus don't stay on maximum frequency on v4.8-rc1. (I suspect
> > that may be why machine does not overheat).
>
> What is worse, they go to low frequency even with "performance"
> governor on v4.8-rc1?!
You sure about it? How did you check it?
Also why are you testing on 4.8-rc1? And not a 4.8 stable kernel? What if the
core is already fixed upstream ?
There is one core fix in 4.8:
commit 899bb6642f2a ("cpufreq: skip invalid entries when searching the
frequency")
> pavel@duo:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq$ sudo cat
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/cpuinfo_cur_freq ; sudo cat
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/cpuinfo_cur_freq ; sudo cat
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/cpuinfo_cur_freq ; sudo cat
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/cpuinfo_cur_freq ; sudo cat
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/cpuinfo_cur_freq ; sudo cat
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/cpuinfo_cur_freq
> 1000000
> 1000000
> 1000000
> 1000000
> 1833000
> 1833000
> 1000000
> 1000000
> 1833000
> 1833000
> 1000000
> 1000000
Is this happening because of thermal capping ? That is the only reason that I
could think of where freq can change with performance governor.
> pavel@duo:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq$ grep -i
> . /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/*
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/affected_cpus:0
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/bios_limit:1000000
> grep: /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/cpuinfo_cur_freq:
> Permission denied
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:1833000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/cpuinfo_min_freq:1000000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/cpuinfo_transition_latency:10000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/freqdomain_cpus:0 1
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/related_cpus:0
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_available_frequencies:1833000
> 1333000 1000000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_available_governors:conservative
> powersave schedutil ondemand performance
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq:1000000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_driver:acpi-cpufreq
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_governor:performance
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_max_freq:1000000
And this value sort of confirms it.
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_min_freq:1000000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_setspeed:<unsupported>
> grep: /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/stats: Is a directory
> pavel@duo:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq$
>
> Let me try v4.9-rc2... that works ok (cpus at the high frequency
> during the kernel build). Unfortunately that sends my cpus to 99C
> temperature range (and eventually forces emergency shutdown).
Unbelievable.
> v4.9-rc2, current policy changes without me touching it. Notice the
> 1.47GHz below? I did not do that, it oscilates itself. Is that thermal
> protection?
Looks like to me.
Can we verify somehow about what's the situation should look like? Perhaps with
some older stable kernel? And then see if 4.8.X works fine or 4.9-rc.
--
viresh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-04 9:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-04 8:38 v4.8-rc1: thinkpad x60: running at low frequency even during kernel build Pavel Machek
2016-11-04 8:58 ` Pavel Machek
2016-11-04 9:10 ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2016-11-04 9:26 ` Pavel Machek
2016-11-04 9:31 ` Viresh Kumar
2016-11-05 18:21 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2016-11-05 19:24 ` Thinkpad power management (was Re: v4.8-rc1: thinkpad x60: running at low frequency even during kernel build) Pavel Machek
2016-11-04 14:05 ` v4.8-rc1: thinkpad x60: running at low frequency even during kernel build Pandruvada, Srinivas
2016-11-04 20:44 ` Pavel Machek
2016-11-04 21:13 ` Pandruvada, Srinivas
2016-11-05 8:42 ` Pavel Machek
2016-11-05 17:46 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2016-11-05 19:36 ` Pavel Machek
2016-11-06 3:45 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2016-11-04 22:16 ` Pavel Machek
2016-11-04 23:20 ` Pandruvada, Srinivas
2016-11-05 13:20 ` Pavel Machek
2016-11-05 13:33 ` Pandruvada, Srinivas
2016-11-05 13:53 ` Pavel Machek
2016-11-05 14:04 ` Pavel Machek
2016-11-05 14:19 ` Pandruvada, Srinivas
2016-11-05 15:34 ` Pavel Machek
2016-11-05 13:37 ` Pavel Machek
2016-11-05 13:55 ` Pandruvada, Srinivas
2016-11-05 14:21 ` Pavel Machek
2016-11-05 20:31 ` Pavel Machek
2016-11-09 11:34 ` thinkpad x60, T40p: overheat with v4.9-rc4 (was Re: v4.8-rc1: thinkpad x60: running at low frequency even during kernel build) Pavel Machek
2016-11-14 19:03 ` 6ea8c546f3655 breaks thermal management on thinkpad x60 and t40p Pavel Machek
2016-11-14 19:54 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-11-05 18:04 ` v4.8-rc1: thinkpad x60: running at low frequency even during kernel build Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2016-11-05 19:56 ` Pavel Machek
2016-11-05 11:21 ` Zhang Rui
2016-11-05 13:10 ` Pavel Machek
2016-11-05 12:22 ` Pavel Machek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20161104091037.GD3414@vireshk-i7 \
--to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.