From: Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [BUG][2.6.30] Niced processes do not raise CPU frequency with ondemand
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 18:44:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200906121844.02004.elendil@planet.nl> (raw)
I first noticed this while (cross-)compiling several 2.6.30 kernels on my
Core Duo HP 2510p notebook. I run the kernel builds with 'nice -n 10' and
noticed that both cores stayed at 800MHz instead of going up to 1333MHz.
It does not seem to be a cpufreq problem as the frequency does go up if I
run the process without nice.
I can simply reproduce it by running an empty loop:
$ sh -c "while :; do :; done" => one core immediately goes to 1333MHz
$ nice -n 10 sh -c "while :; do :; done" => both cores stay at 800MHz
In both cases top shows 99/100% CPU usage for one core.
The problem does not occur immediately after a new boot: the cpu frequency
does get raised to 1333MHz even for niced processes. I've also checked
that a single suspend to RAM + resume cycle does not trigger it.
It is possible that it is triggered by undocking the notebook (I have not
verified that yet), but I do know that the problem remains after the
notebook is docked again.
I'm certain that the problem did not occur with earlier kernels (even when
undocked), but am not sure when it first started happening. As I'm not
yet certain how to trigger it, I cannot currently check that.
System is running x86_64 kernel with Debian stable ("Lenny") userland.
Any suggestions?
Cheers,
FJP
# grep . /sys/devices/system/cpu/*/cpufreq/*
.../cpu0/cpufreq/affected_cpus:0
.../cpu0/cpufreq/cpuinfo_cur_freq:800000
.../cpu0/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:1333000
.../cpu0/cpufreq/cpuinfo_min_freq:800000
.../cpu0/cpufreq/cpuinfo_transition_latency:10000
.../cpu0/cpufreq/related_cpus:0 1
.../cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_available_frequencies:1333000 1200000 1067000
933000 800000
.../cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_available_governors:ondemand performance
.../cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq:800000
.../cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_driver:acpi-cpufreq
.../cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_governor:ondemand
.../cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_max_freq:1333000
.../cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_min_freq:800000
.../cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_setspeed:<unsupported>
.../cpu1/cpufreq/affected_cpus:1
.../cpu1/cpufreq/cpuinfo_cur_freq:800000
.../cpu1/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:1333000
.../cpu1/cpufreq/cpuinfo_min_freq:800000
.../cpu1/cpufreq/cpuinfo_transition_latency:10000
.../cpu1/cpufreq/related_cpus:0 1
.../cpu1/cpufreq/scaling_available_frequencies:1333000 1200000 1067000
933000 800000
.../cpu1/cpufreq/scaling_available_governors:ondemand performance
.../cpu1/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq:800000
.../cpu1/cpufreq/scaling_driver:acpi-cpufreq
.../cpu1/cpufreq/scaling_governor:ondemand
.../cpu1/cpufreq/scaling_max_freq:1333000
.../cpu1/cpufreq/scaling_min_freq:800000
.../cpu1/cpufreq/scaling_setspeed:<unsupported>
next reply other threads:[~2009-06-12 16:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-12 16:44 Frans Pop [this message]
2009-06-12 16:48 ` [BUG][2.6.30] Niced processes do not raise CPU frequency with ondemand Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2009-06-12 17:25 ` Frans Pop
2009-06-12 17:41 ` Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2009-06-12 18:05 ` Frans Pop
2009-06-13 18:01 ` [SOMEWHAT SOLVED] " Frans Pop
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=200906121844.02004.elendil@planet.nl \
--to=elendil@planet.nl \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox