linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: srinivas pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
To: Russell Haley <yumpusamongus@gmail.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Use CPPC to get scaling factors
Date: Thu, 01 May 2025 10:13:01 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b1bc2569b0da4c6749e896eee0fdf0af97c18fea.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53027db5-f750-4b6f-8ac5-a849dff2524b@gmail.com>

Hi Russell,


On Wed, 2025-04-30 at 20:28 -0500, Russell Haley wrote:
> 
> On 12/5/24 5:39 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> > +	 * Compute the perf-to-frequency scaling factor for the
> > given CPU if
> > +	 * possible, unless it would be 0.
> > +	 */
> > +	if (!cppc_get_perf_caps(cpu, &cppc_perf) &&
> > +	    cppc_perf.nominal_perf && cppc_perf.nominal_freq)
> > +		return div_u64(cppc_perf.nominal_freq *
> > KHZ_PER_MHZ,
> > +			       cppc_perf.nominal_perf);
> 
Can you dump the output of

 grep -r . /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/acpi_cppc/

Thanks,
Srinivas

> I think this exposed a firmware bug on ARL. I have a Core Ultra 265K,
> and two of the E-cores report 33 for nominal_perf, while the others
> report 46. They all report 3300 for nominal_freq.
> 
> The result is that the kernel thinks these two E-cores are capable of
> 6.5 GHz.
> 
> > grep . /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:5400000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:5500000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:5400000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:5400000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:5400000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu5/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:5400000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu6/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:5400000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu7/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:5500000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu8/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:4600000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu9/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:4600000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu10/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:4600000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu11/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:4600000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu12/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:6500000 # wow
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu13/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:6500000 #
> amazing
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu14/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:4600000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu15/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:4600000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu16/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:4600000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu17/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:4600000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu18/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:4600000
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu19/cpufreq/cpuinfo_max_freq:4600000
> 
> Hopefully you have the ear of someone on the firmware team so that a
> ticket can be created for this.
> 
> In Phoronix discussion, users have reported seeing this on both
> ASRock
> and MSI motherboards:
> 
> https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/hardware/processors-memory/1541981-intel-core-ultra-9-285k-arrow-lake-performance-on-linux-has-improved-a-lot-since-launch?p=1543676#post1543676
> 
> ----------
> 
> Also, this may be related... I can't set scaling_max_freq to odd
> multiples of 100 MHz, only even. Checking with:
> 
>     x86_energy_perf_policy &| grep -i req
> 
> reveals that some values of max are being skipped. Setting manually
> with
> 
>     x86_energy_perf_policy --cpu 0-7 --hwp-max 76
> 
> allows the odd multiples to be accessed. Integer division issue
> somewhere?
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2025-05-01 17:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-12-05 11:30 [PATCH v1 0/2] intel_pstate: Use information from CPPC to compute hybrid scaling factors Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-12-05 11:39 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Use CPPC to get " Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-05-01  1:28   ` Russell Haley
2025-05-01 17:13     ` srinivas pandruvada [this message]
2025-05-01 21:33       ` Russell Haley
2025-05-01 23:12         ` srinivas pandruvada
2024-12-05 11:40 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Drop Arrow Lake from "scaling factor" list Rafael J. Wysocki

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=b1bc2569b0da4c6749e896eee0fdf0af97c18fea.camel@linux.intel.com \
    --to=srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=yumpusamongus@gmail.com \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).