From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Olaf Freyer Subject: Re: Erroneous package power limit notification since kernel 2.6.39 Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:37:09 +0200 Message-ID: <4E0C1995.20009@gmx.net> References: <4DD9092A.4080507@gmx.net> <20110626182725.3f2eac8d@schatten.dmk.lab> <4E0A3DB1.8000202@gmx.net> <20110628135936.297293b4@jbarnes-desktop> <4E0A4319.6040309@gmx.net> <20110628141831.55502d76@jbarnes-desktop> <4E0A4F56.90806@gmx.net> <20110628150644.14805e83@jbarnes-desktop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110628150644.14805e83@jbarnes-desktop> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jesse Barnes Cc: Florian Mickler , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chris Wilson , Keith Packard , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Am 29.06.2011 00:06, schrieb Jesse Barnes: > On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 00:01:58 +0200 > Olaf Freyer wrote: > >> Am 28.06.2011 23:18, schrieb Jesse Barnes: >>> Ok interesting, didn't realize X startup was so GPU intensive. :) >>> >>> The patch you reverted will definitely cause the GPU to ramp up its >>> frequency much faster than before, but it sounds like on your system >>> you might also see it with the revert if you run something GPU >>> intensive like nexuiz. >>> >>> The CPU (and by extension the GPU) will take care of itself though; if >>> things get too hot or over power, it will clock throttle to keep itself >>> in a safe range. >> I also see the message alot during my daily average usage of my computer >> (just using Firefox, Thunderbird and IntelliJ) - seeing things like >> CPU3: Package power limit notification (total events = 90809) >> after a normal day in the office became normal since 2.6.39. >> >> I just gave nexuiz a try for about 30 minutes with the reversal patch >> applied - >> and not a single message appeared in my logs. > Sounds like with the patch reverted we can't drive your GPU and CPU > hard enough to generate the messages. Not sure if that's a good thing > or a bad thing though... > I'm not sure either. I saw a single notification event yesterday while in office - previously I would have recieved 70000-90000 during that timeframe. I consider the pure amount of notifications unsettling - and in case of some "real" issue it might even get lost inbetween those notifications. Maybe there is a possible compromise between the situation before and after the patch? I'm willing to lose a few percent of GPU performance just for the sake of getting lost of those notification events...