All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chris Ferron <chris.e.ferron at linux.intel.com>
To: powertop@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [Powertop] PowerTOP 2.0 bugs
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 15:05:20 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FB181A0.9020803@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: CABRT9RBEN=Jz6YuSRbVL+kob7Gb_LXPRhLN2pMq5Dm1wbpoR9A@mail.gmail.com

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3332 bytes --]

On 05/11/2012 09:29 AM, Marti Raudsepp wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> I read that PowerTOP 2.0 was released yesterday, so I decided to give
> it a run again. First I saw some discrepancy in the CPU usage reported
> by PowerTOP. So I ran "while true; do openssl speed aes -multi 4;
> done" to utilize all my 4 CPU cores at 100%. htop displays utilization
> 4x100% all the time. PowerTOP thinks:
Can you please tell me what system, processors and distro (and version) 
you are running?
Also are you running in a VM by chance?

> Summary: 0.2 wakeups/second,  0.0 GPU ops/second, 0.0 VFS ops/sec and
> 187.1% CPU use
>
>                 Usage       Events/s    Category       Description
>              1816 ms/s      0.00        Process        openssl speed
> aes -multi 4
>
> The usage numbers are clearly bogus.
Why do you think theyt
> Then I remembered that I already reported some bugs about the PowerTOP
> 2.0 beta release I tested in January 2011:
>
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 9:14 PM, Marti Raudsepp<marti(a)juffo.org>  wrote:
>> First, I also see an empty "Idle stats" screen, as reported by Ian
>> Kumlien earlier. Old PowerTOP didn't report idle state statistics
>> either, but at least it had an explanatory message.
> "Idle stats page" is still empty:
>
>           Package   |            CPU 0
>                     |            CPU 1
>                     |            CPU 2
>                     |            CPU 3
>
>> Fourth, the "Frequency stats" screen starts up showing good numbers,
>> but after the first refresh, all per-core numbers turn bogus. For each
>> core, the percentages always add up to 1895% !
> Still occurs, but now the magic constant is always 1961.1%
>
>             Package |            CPU 0
> Idle         0.0%   | Idle         0.6%
>   800 MHz     0.0%   |  800 MHz     0.4%
> 3.00 GHz   100.0%   | 3.00 GHz   1960.1%
> 1.80 GHz     0.0%   | 2.31 GHz     0.0%
> 2.31 GHz     0.0%   |
>
>                     |            CPU 1
>                     | Idle         2.6%
>                     |  800 MHz     0.3%
>                     | 3.00 GHz   1958.1%
>                     | 2.31 GHz     0.0%
>                     |
>
>                     |            CPU 2
>                     | Idle         2.0%
>                     |  800 MHz     0.3%
>                     | 3.00 GHz   1958.8%
>                     | 1.80 GHz     0.0%
>                     | 2.31 GHz     0.0%
>
>                     |            CPU 3
>                     | Idle         1.9%
>                     |  800 MHz     0.2%
>                     | 3.00 GHz   1958.7%
>                     | 1.80 GHz     0.3%
>                     | 2.31 GHz     0.0%
>
> Can anyone remind me why do you do beta releases and why should users
> spend their time reporting bugs?
Your bug was not ignored, it was not seen before release during our 
testing.
I have spent three hours testing this bug using your test case above, 
and am not seeing the issue.
So it may very well be there is an hardware corner case I need to track 
down. Which is why I asked the above questions.

-Chris
>
> Regards,
> Marti
> _______________________________________________
> PowerTop mailing list
> PowerTop(a)lists.01.org
> https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/powertop


             reply	other threads:[~2012-05-14 22:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-05-14 22:05 Chris Ferron [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-06-01 20:05 [Powertop] PowerTOP 2.0 bugs Marti Raudsepp
2012-06-01 19:58 Chris Ferron
2012-06-01 16:37 Marti Raudsepp
2012-05-16 21:04 Marti Raudsepp
2012-05-15 17:29 Chris Ferron
2012-05-14 23:11 Marti Raudsepp
2012-05-14 22:57 Marti Raudsepp
2012-05-14 22:25 Arjan van de Ven
2012-05-14 22:23 
2012-05-11 16:56 Arjan van de Ven
2012-05-11 16:29 Marti Raudsepp

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=4FB181A0.9020803@linux.intel.com \
    --to=powertop@lists.01.org \
    /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.