Re: [PATCH 09/19] eeepc-laptop: support for super hybrid engine (SHE)

[Corentin Chary <corentin.chary@gmail.com>]

On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Alan Jenkins
<alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Corentin Chary wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Alan Jenkins
>> <alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Corentin Chary wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Alan Jenkins
>>>> <alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Corentin Chary wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sunday 24 May 2009 19:29:37 Alan Jenkins wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Corentin Chary wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Alan Jenkins
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <sourcejedi.lkml@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 5/16/09, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> From: Grigori Goronzy <greg@chown.ath.cx>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The older eeepc-acpi driver allowed to control the SHE performance
>>>>>>>>>> preset through a ACPI function for just this purpose. SHE
>>>>>>>>>> underclocks
>>>>>>>>>> and undervolts the FSB and undervolts the CPU (at preset 2,
>>>>>>>>>> "powersave"), or slightly overclocks the CPU (at preset 0,
>>>>>>>>>> "performance"). Preset 1 is the default setting with default
>>>>>>>>>> clocks and
>>>>>>>>>> voltage.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The new eeepc-laptop driver doesn't support it anymore.
>>>>>>>>>> The attached patch adds support for it to eeepc-laptop. It's very
>>>>>>>>>> straight-forward and almost trivial.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Grigori Goronzy <greg@chown.ath.cx>
>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Corentin Chary <corentincj@iksaif.net>
>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi, out of curiosity I tried this on my EeePC 701.  I upgraded the
>>>>>>>>> BIOS to the latest version available a few months ago.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I find that the file is present and can successfully be read from.
>>>>>>>>> The file returns the value "513".  If I write "1" to it, nothing
>>>>>>>>> happens.  If I write "0" to it, the speakers start hissing and the
>>>>>>>>> file then returns the value "512".  Writing "1" again gets it back
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> normal.  There is no apparent effect on performance.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is stupid, because we _do_ appear to check the BIOS supported
>>>>>>>>> features bitmask, but that's Asus firmware for you.  Can you please
>>>>>>>>> add an extra test, so this file only allows  reads or writes if the
>>>>>>>>> current value is 0 or 1?  If you're quick you might slip it into
>>>>>>>>> -rc8
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi, Can you try this patch ? It seems to works for me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, it does make the interface less confusing. The behaviour (no
>>>>> performance change, hissing speakers) is the same.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It works on mine (original bios). But I don't know how to see if there
>>>> is a performance change.
>>>> Is there a quick cpu bench ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I used:
>>>
>>> time for {1..10000}; do echo -n; done
>>>
>>> It's a bit bogus - I expect it would show if my 630Mhz processor jumped
>>> to 900Mhz, but smaller changes might be lost in noise.
>>>
>>> <http://pavelmachek.livejournal.com/77425.html> suggests "time factor
>>> $[65863223*65863159]", which should be better.
>>>
>>> I think it's also significant that the current (630Mhz) setting is "1".
>>> I would expect "0" to be slower - but in the original 701 BIOS, 630Mhz
>>> is the slower of the two speeds, right?
>>>
>>
>> 1 - time factor: ~ 1.574s  - default, seems to be 630Mhz
>> 0 - time factor: ~ 1.01s    - seems to be 900
>>
>>
>
> How illogical :-).  Oh - I should have read the commit message, this is the
> expected order (and proper SHE just has the extra state: 2 / "performance").
>
> Perhaps we should DMI-blacklist 701s with newer BIOS versions, so we only
> provide the performance control when it is available from the BIOS setup
> screen.  The specific version is well-documented e.g. on forum.eeeuser.com.
>

Upgraded my 701 to latest bios 1302. Everything works fine.
I've got a 701 4G, yours is a  701SD ?

Thanks


-- 
Corentin Chary
http://xf.iksaif.net - http://uffs.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html