Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 08 Jun 2008 22:13:43 -0700
From:      "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net>
To:        Jeremy Chadwick <koitsu@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Evren Yurtesen <yurtesen@ispro.net>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, Andrew Snow <andrew@modulus.org>
Subject:   Re: cpufreq broken on core2duo 
Message-ID:  <20080609051343.CFD4D45010@ptavv.es.net>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 07 Jun 2008 09:48:12 PDT." <20080607164812.GA11072@eos.sc1.parodius.com> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--==_Exmh_1212988423_87733P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

> Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 09:48:12 -0700
> From: Jeremy Chadwick <koitsu@FreeBSD.org>
> Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
> 
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 05:51:38PM +0300, Evren Yurtesen wrote:
> > By the way, there is another thing I am wondering about. If I enable HTT 
> > and Intel Enhanced SpeedStep in bios on a 3.00GHZ p4 CPU I see:
> >
> > cpu0: <ACPI CPU> on acpi0
> > acpi_perf0: <ACPI CPU Frequency Control> on cpu0
> > p4tcc0: <CPU Frequency Thermal Control> on cpu0
> > cpu1: <ACPI CPU> on acpi0
> > est1: <Enhanced SpeedStep Frequency Control> on cpu1
> > est: CPU supports Enhanced Speedstep, but is not recognized.
> > est: cpu_vendor GenuineIntel, msr f2700000f27
> > device_attach: est1 attach returned 6
> > p4tcc1: <CPU Frequency Thermal Control> on cpu1
> >
> > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1500/27000 1312/23625 1200/13000 1050/11375 900/9750 
> > 750/8125 600/6500 450/4875 300/3250 150/1625
> > dev.acpi_perf.0.freq_settings: 1500/27000 1200/13000
> > dev.cpufreq.0.%driver: cpufreq
> > dev.cpufreq.0.%parent: cpu0
> > dev.cpufreq.1.%driver: cpufreq
> > dev.cpufreq.1.%parent: cpu1
> > dev.p4tcc.0.freq_settings: 10000/-1 8750/-1 7500/-1 6250/-1 5000/-1 3750/-1 
> > 2500/-1 1250/-1
> > dev.p4tcc.1.freq_settings: 10000/-1 8750/-1 7500/-1 6250/-1 5000/-1 3750/-1 
> > 2500/-1 1250/-1
> >
> > and it does not allow me to set the freq. of the cpu.
> 
> How are you setting the frequency?  Are you using powerd?  You do not
> have to enable SpeedStep in your BIOS to achieve throttling CPU clock
> speed.  In fact, I would highly recommend leaving EIST/SpeedStep in the
> BIOS *disabled*, and let powerd adjust the clock frequency via ACPI.

I must strongly recommend against this. EST is MUCH more efficient on
its control of power use than simple throttling. So much so that on my
systems that support EST, I remove cpufreq from the kernel. (In all
cases, throttling means either simple throttling or throttling by using
TCC.) 

I did quite a bit of testing on power management a year or so ago and
found that throttling was of value only for controlling CPU temperature.
For real power management, EST works far better as it adjust frequency
(actual clock rate) and CPU voltage while throttling just stops and
starts the clock without changing its actual frequency. (This came as a
surprise to me about 5 years ago when I first discovered it.)

At idle, throttling does exactly nothing. EST reduces voltage on the
CPU and saves power even when idle. At full CPU load, throttling reduces
performance and power consumption equally. EST beats it by a slim
margin.

The big win is at moderate load. Throttling can result is very poor
results for aps like video and music which will place a continuous load
on the system, but only 20-60% (in the case of my test system). It
tended to make the system seem sluggish. EST does a much better job in
this case as it lowers CP voltage and clock rate to maximize performance
while minimizing power.

If your only concern is keeping the system cool, throttling will do the
job, but if you want efficient power utilization, use EST if possible.
-- 
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
E-mail: oberman@es.net			Phone: +1 510 486-8634
Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4  EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751

--==_Exmh_1212988423_87733P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 06/03/2002

iD8DBQFITLwHkn3rs5h7N1ERApXwAJ4se7iwJndrmqZIen+JOb1ckcTcSgCglZck
war9A/b4cFQcgxmSvhvw2Sg=
=65cM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--==_Exmh_1212988423_87733P--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080609051343.CFD4D45010>