On 06.09.2018 4:15, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> Okay, "system openssl" and the FreeBSD version is enough to nail down the
> code and configuration, and I see the processor type is in the subject
> line. I guess posting the CPU features bits from dmesg might save whoever
> tries to track down the
On 06.09.2018 4:15, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> Okay, "system openssl" and the FreeBSD version is enough to nail down the
> code and configuration, and I see the processor type is in the subject
> line. I guess posting the CPU features bits from dmesg might save whoever
> tries to track down the
On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 03:02:29AM +0300, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
> Hello Benjamin,
>
> Thursday, September 6, 2018, 1:32:46 AM, you wrote:
>
> >> > I don't think you need something accurate.
> >> Ok, here is results. I'm working in single-user mode.
> >>
> >> TL;DR "Turbo" mode make "openssl"
Hello Benjamin,
Thursday, September 6, 2018, 1:32:46 AM, you wrote:
>> > I don't think you need something accurate.
>> Ok, here is results. I'm working in single-user mode.
>>
>> TL;DR "Turbo" mode make "openssl" much slower (x3.5)!
>>
>> I can not properly interpret this result.
> You
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 07:27:06PM +0300, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
> On 05.09.2018 17:51, Cy Schubert wrote:
>
> > I don't think you need something accurate.
> Ok, here is results. I'm working in single-user mode.
>
> TL;DR "Turbo" mode make "openssl" much slower (x3.5)!
>
> I can not properly
On 05.09.2018 17:51, Cy Schubert wrote:
> I don't think you need something accurate.
Ok, here is results. I'm working in single-user mode.
TL;DR "Turbo" mode make "openssl" much slower (x3.5)!
I can not properly interpret this result.
But "turbostat" properly detect Turbo/No-Turbo mode, so
On 05.09.2018 17:51, Cy Schubert wrote:
> I don't think you need something accurate.
1.6GHz and 2.48Ghz.. Maybe... I i'm trying now.
> We don't know whether it is implemented through ACPI or similar to the
> old turbo jumper on the MB, which increased the clock rate and sometimes
> the voltage
I don't think you need something accurate.
We don't know whether it is implemented through ACPI or similar to the old
turbo jumper on the MB, which increased the clock rate and sometimes the
voltage ( required to maintain stability when increasing the clock rate). We
don't know how your MB
On 05.09.2018 15:53, Cy Schubert wrote:
>> 1601 is not the actual frequency. That is just how it is reported. It
>> is almost certainly running much higher than 1601.
>
> We don't know this until we can independently verify it. Do you mind
> running some benchmarks with and without turbo
In message <43d68d5a-d8b7-965d-52a6-3eff6cdae...@vangyzen.net>, Eric
van Gyzen
writes:
> On 9/5/18 4:35 AM, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
> > BTW, these four settings in rc.conf(5)
> >
> >performance_cx_lowest
> >performance_cpu_freq
> >economy_cx_lowest
> >economy_cpu_freq
> >
> >
On 9/5/18 4:35 AM, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
BTW, these four settings in rc.conf(5)
performance_cx_lowest
performance_cpu_freq
economy_cx_lowest
economy_cpu_freq
do NOTHING. They are not used ANYWHERE but rc.conf and rc.conf.5!
They are used by /etc/rc.d/power_profile, but not in
Hello Cy,
Wednesday, September 5, 2018, 3:12:34 AM, you wrote:
> Are you running powers?
powerd? yes. With "adaptive" strategy"
> Do you use c-states?
Oops. My fault. I've forgot to set cx_lowest to C3 on all cores.
BTW, these four settings in rc.conf(5)
performance_cx_lowest
Are you running powers?
Do you use c-states?
What happens if you boot in (instead of switch to) turbo mode?
---
Sent using a tiny phone keyboard.
Apologies for any typos and autocorrect.
Also, this old phone only supports top post. Apologies.
Cy Schubert
or
The need of the many outweighs the
13 matches
Mail list logo
