From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S942756AbcJSUGP (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Oct 2016 16:06:15 -0400 Received: from resqmta-po-12v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.171]:50815 "EHLO resqmta-po-12v.sys.comcast.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S942161AbcJSUGO (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Oct 2016 16:06:14 -0400 Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 15:06:10 -0500 From: Tim Walberg To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Tim Walberg , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux PM list , Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: 4.8.1 regression with cpufreq governors Message-ID: <20161019200610.GB9047@comcast.net> Reply-To: Tim Walberg Mail-Followup-To: Tim Walberg , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux PM list , Viresh Kumar References: <20161018004606.GA5559@comcast.net> <2549240.nvakNXlyKF@vostro.rjw.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2549240.nvakNXlyKF@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfE+NvSHN0M+dRh28Xp20QYecuI+auqWrLYasPOOesDJvqu3oM1MuiLoZDi+FuPjGrKMMVxfmPJOWZryqx1A5oUdzc+cFFyoEqxzQqVT7iPAbjLXlTzgb SmOt1iecGicGMGdKUQrkZU063HTAhbJQnt8Z0UmE8JQsnzuNDIMiFQNiqzOL6G8iPWBobLQeoxjusMaTKGIkfv2B23+OuOmffdmt06bcxaQTg5XY9WtRKkbA iHZpmAiB6Zh6iZ3b6khV/9Rzo9Unj9f5OYOuQLPMwhGwKbWO1TWSrK8LSKFIge1vfiNiu+KkHr07MdcBaN11oA== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This indeed turned out to be the fix. On 10/18/2016 23:10 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Monday, October 17, 2016 07:46:06 PM Tim Walberg wrote: >> > May or may not be related to similar reports, but here's what I've just observed >> > on my system. Built a stock kernel from tags/v4.8.1, relevant cpufreq bits: >> > >> > CONFIG_ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS=y >> > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ=y >> > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_ATTR_SET=y >> > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_COMMON=y >> > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_STAT=y >> > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_STAT_DETAILS=y >> > # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE is not set >> > # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_POWERSAVE is not set >> > # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_USERSPACE is not set >> > # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_ONDEMAND is not set >> > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_CONSERVATIVE=y >> > # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_SCHEDUTIL is not set >> > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_PERFORMANCE=y >> > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_POWERSAVE=m >> > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_USERSPACE=m >> > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_ONDEMAND=m >> > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_CONSERVATIVE=y >> > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_SCHEDUTIL=m >> > # CONFIG_X86_PCC_CPUFREQ is not set >> > CONFIG_X86_ACPI_CPUFREQ=m >> > CONFIG_X86_ACPI_CPUFREQ_CPB=y >> > >> > >> > Conservative is set as default governer, yet when boot completes, all CPUs are >> > pegged at the highest frequency. Changing governor to powersave knocks them all >> > down to the lowest available frequency. Putting them back on conservative (or >> > ondemand) results in no change in frequency, despite generating load. Switching >> > to performance of course kicks them back up to high frequency. Basically, the >> > governors don't seem to be ... governing. >> >> The "convervative" governor issue seems to be the one fixed recently >> (http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/commit/?h=pm-cpufreq&id=abb6627910a1e783c8e034b35b7c80e5e7f98f41). >> >> I'm not sure why "ondemand" behaves incorrectly for you though. >> >> Thanks, >> Rafael End of included message -- twalberg@gmail.com, twalberg@comcast.net