The documentation is uhm, what's on intel's (growing) blog post and responses:
https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-performance-counter-monitor-a-better-way-to-measure-cpu-utilization Yes, we can / should add clearer documentation. I had to also go hunting in the source to figure some of it out. FREQ/AFREQ is just the current clock cycle counters / clock reference counter (TSC). Ie, a freq or afreq of 1.0 means the clock cycle counters == TSC counter. FREQ takes the sleep state into account (ie, only counts _running_ cycles.) AFREQ doesn't. So FREQ gives you a good indication of the running duty cycle versus the ideal maximum, and AFREQ tells you what frequency the core is running at versus the reference frequency. An AFREQ of < 1.0 means that the chip is underclocking that core. An AFREQ of > 1.0 means turboboost is on and it's overclocking that core. -a On 11 May 2014 17:40, Kevin Oberman <rkober...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Adrian Chadd <adr...@freebsd.org> wrote: >> >> cool! >> >> next; >> >> # pkg install intel-pcm >> # kldload cpuctl >> # pcm.x 1 >> >> See what it reports. > > > OK. Any documentation on what this is supposed to tell me? Some of it makes > perfect sense and some baffles me. > > I see C-states of C1 and C6 when on AC and C1, C3, and C7 when on battery > (and, of course, C0). FREQ vs. AFREQ look interesting, but I'm not sure I > really understand the implications. The last few lines, from " PHYSICAL CORE > IPC", are particularly mysterious to me. I can understand the words, but I > think that they carry more significance than is obvious, at least to me. I'm > not a hardware guy. > -- > R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired > E-mail: rkober...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-acpi-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
