Re: issues with powerd/freq_levels

[Karl Denninger]

On 8/2/2017 13:06, Ian Smith wrote:
> Is it working on the others?  Does it actually idle at 600MHz?  If in 
> doubt, running 'powerd -v' for a while will show you what's happening.  
> Despite being low power, running slower when more or less idle - along 
> with hopefully getting to use C2 state - should cool these down a lot.
>
Yes.  "powerd -v" sez (once it gets going)

load   3%, current freq  600 MHz ( 2), wanted freq  600 MHz
load   6%, current freq  600 MHz ( 2), wanted freq  600 MHz
load   0%, current freq  600 MHz ( 2), wanted freq  600 MHz
load   0%, current freq  600 MHz ( 2), wanted freq  600 MHz
load   0%, current freq  600 MHz ( 2), wanted freq  600 MHz
load   8%, current freq  600 MHz ( 2), wanted freq  600 MHz
load   4%, current freq  600 MHz ( 2), wanted freq  600 MHz
load   3%, current freq  600 MHz ( 2), wanted freq  600 MHz
load   4%, current freq  600 MHz ( 2), wanted freq  600 MHz
load   0%, current freq  600 MHz ( 2), wanted freq  600 MHz
load  14%, current freq  600 MHz ( 2), wanted freq  600 MHz

dev.cpu.3.temperature: 58.5C
dev.cpu.2.temperature: 58.5C
dev.cpu.1.temperature: 58.5C
dev.cpu.0.temperature: 58.5C

-- 
Karl Denninger
k...@denninger.net 
/The Market Ticker/
/[S/MIME encrypted email preferred]/


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: issues with powerd/freq_levels

[Ian Smith]

On Wed, 2 Aug 2017 13:30:03 +0300, Daniel Braniss wrote:
 > > On 1 Aug 2017, at 20:45, Ian Smith  wrote:
 > > 
 > > On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:03:27 -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote:
 > >> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:48 AM, Ian Smith  wrote:
 > >> 
 > >>> On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:09:11 +0300, Daniel Braniss wrote:
 > >>> 
 >  I am trying out PCengines latest apu2 boards, and I just noticed that
 > >>> with different Freebsd versions I get
 >  different freq_levels, and so when idling, each box (have 5) has a
 > >>> different freq/temperature value, ranging
 >  from 125/69.1C, 600/59.0C to 75/56.0C
 >  
 >  FreeBSD apu-4 11.1-STABLE FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE #5 f565b5a06ab3 (11) tip:
 > >>> Mon Jul 31 09:36:33 IDT 2017
 >  apu-4# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
 >  dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/980 800/807 600/609
 > >>> 
 > >>> That looks about right.

Time to cut out lots and summarise a bit, from your dmesgs:

apu-3 dmesg that you posted, presumably the same 11.1-STABLE as the 
apu-4 above, to within a few days, shows only:

hwpstate0:  on cpu0
random: harvesting attach, 8 bytes (4 bits) from cpufreq0
random: harvesting attach, 8 bytes (4 bits) from hwpstate0
Device configuration finished.

Which appears to be what you want - but are you seeing the hwpstate 
errors from powerd that Karl commented on?

 > >>> hint.p4tcc.0.disabled=1
 > >>> hint.acpi_throttle.0.disabled=1

 >  FreeBSD apu-5 11.1-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 11.1-PRERELEASE #0 21e9d1ca9b80
 > >>> (11) tip: Tue May 30 11:51:48 IDT 2017
 >  apu-5# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
 >  dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/966 875/845 800/795 700/695 600/600 525/525
 > >>> 450/450 375/375 300/300 225/225 150/150 75/75
 > >>> 
 > >>> Looks like either p4tcc or acpi_throttle is enabled?  See cpufreq(4).

hwpstate0:  on cpu0
random: harvesting attach, 8 bytes (4 bits) from hwpstate0
acpi_throttle1:  on cpu1
acpi_throttle1: failed to attach P_CNT
device_attach: acpi_throttle1 attach returned 6
acpi_throttle2:  on cpu2
acpi_throttle2: failed to attach P_CNT
device_attach: acpi_throttle2 attach returned 6
acpi_throttle3:  on cpu3
acpi_throttle3: failed to attach P_CNT
device_attach: acpi_throttle3 attach returned 6
Device configuration finished.

So it's loaded hwpstate(0) but only apparently successfully attached to 
cpu0, and failed to attach acpi_throttle to cpus 1-3, yet the cpu0 
freq_levels are those of your 3 real freqs (1000, 800, 600) times all 
x/8 factors.  So that one may not have hint.acpi_throttle.0.disabled=1?

 >  FreeBSD apu-1 10.3-STABLE FreeBSD 10.3-STABLE #4 267788fd852c (10) tip:
 > >>> Tue Jan 10 09:09:00 IST 2017
 >  apu-1# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
 >  dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/-1 875/-1 750/-1 625/-1 500/-1 375/-1
 > >>> 250/-1 125/-1
 > >>> 
 > >>> And that looks like est(4) isn't enabled/attaching at all .. see dmesg
 > >>> on all of these for clues.

This is a different board entirely.  Different CPU, L2 unified cache, 
ethernet devices (Realtek vs Intel), less memory (4G vs 4.5G) and 2 vs 4 
CPUs (unless HT is off on this and on on the others?), SATA-2 vs SATA-3 
on ada0, only USB2 vs some USB3 (XHCI), and a different cpufreq setup 
again .. no sign of hwpstate and:

acpi_throttle0:  on cpu0
acpi_throttle0: P_CNT from P_BLK 0x810
acpi_throttle1:  on cpu1
acpi_throttle1: failed to attach P_CNT
device_attach: acpi_throttle1 attach returned 6
Device configuration finished.

Sounds like a bogon must have found its way into your batch?

 > > Danny, can you put up a verbose boot dmesg.boot of one(?) for a browse? 
 > > Or maybe apu-4 and -1, if not all.  I'd expect error msgs on -1 anyway.

 > they are now available   at:
 >  http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/~danny/pcengines/ 
 > 

Thanks, that made it all pretty clear.  Not that I know much about lots 
of this stuff, especially nowadays, but some things stuck out.

Kevin wrote:
 > >> Temperature is a totally separate issue. It is VERY sensitive to external
 > >> issue like airflow and position of the CPU in relation to other components
 > >> in the chassis Also, unless you have a lot of cores, you probably should
 > >> set both economy_cx_lowest and performance_cx_lowest to Cmax. Economy
 > >> should default to that, but  performance will not as that can cause issues
 > >> on systems with large numbers of cores, so is set to C2. Many such system
 > >> used to disable deeper sleep modes in BIOS, but I am way behind the times
 > >> and don't know about the current state of affairs. Certainly for systems
 > >> with 32 or fewer cores, this should not be an issue. In any case, Cx state
 > >> can sharply impact temperature.
 > > 
 > > Indeed.  But as these are low-power devices already, it's likely less of 
 > > a concern, but maximising efficiency and minimising stress never hurts.

Yes, it might be helpful to see Danny's version of the data Karl 

Re: issues with powerd/freq_levels

[Daniel Braniss]

> On 1 Aug 2017, at 20:45, Ian Smith  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:03:27 -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:48 AM, Ian Smith  wrote:
>> 
>>> On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:09:11 +0300, Daniel Braniss wrote:
>>> 
 I am trying out PCengines latest apu2 boards, and I just noticed that
>>> with different Freebsd versions I get
 different freq_levels, and so when idling, each box (have 5) has a
>>> different freq/temperature value, ranging
 from 125/69.1C, 600/59.0C to 75/56.0C
 
 FreeBSD apu-4 11.1-STABLE FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE #5 f565b5a06ab3 (11) tip:
>>> Mon Jul 31 09:36:33 IDT 2017
 apu-4# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
 dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/980 800/807 600/609
>>> 
>>> That looks about right.  On a Core2Duo (still on 9.3) I get:
>>> dev.est.1.freq_settings: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
>>> dev.est.0.freq_settings: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
>>> dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
>>> dev.cpu.0.freq: 800
>>> 
>>> But only because I'd added to /boot/loader.conf:
>>> 
>>> hint.p4tcc.0.disabled=1
>>> hint.acpi_throttle.0.disabled=1
>>> 
>>> which became the defaults sometime, maybe not before 11.0?  Otherwise
>>> mine would look more similar to the one below, with all 12.5% increments
>>> in frequency enabled, which doesn't actually save any power at all.
>>> 
 FreeBSD apu-5 11.1-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 11.1-PRERELEASE #0 21e9d1ca9b80
>>> (11) tip: Tue May 30 11:51:48 IDT 2017
 apu-5# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
 dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/966 875/845 800/795 700/695 600/600 525/525
>>> 450/450 375/375 300/300 225/225 150/150 75/75
>>> 
>>> Looks like either p4tcc or acpi_throttle is enabled?  See cpufreq(4).
>>> As above, these don't buy you anything but extra busyness for powerd.
>>> 
>>> Also noticed that the (nice, low!) milliwatt figures for 1000/800/600
>>> freqs are a bit different to the -stable one.  Slightly Different model?
>>> 
 FreeBSD apu-1 10.3-STABLE FreeBSD 10.3-STABLE #4 267788fd852c (10) tip:
>>> Tue Jan 10 09:09:00 IST 2017
 apu-1# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
 dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/-1 875/-1 750/-1 625/-1 500/-1 375/-1
>>> 250/-1 125/-1
>>> 
>>> And that looks like est(4) isn't enabled/attaching at all .. see dmesg
>>> on all of these for clues.
>>> 
 so, any ideas as to what is going on?
>>> 
>>> Pure guesswork on experience with older versions, I'm not up to date.
>>> 
>> 
>> Very odd. Are all systems running identical CPUs and BIOSes? Identical
>> loader and sysctl configurations? Look at /var/rn/dmesg.boot for CPU
>> information. Is EST being detected? It used to be early in the boot
>> process, but is now fairly late. (In my case, about 2/3 through the
>> dmesg.boot file.
> 
> Hi Kevin, it's been a while ..
> 
> Danny, can you put up a verbose boot dmesg.boot of one(?) for a browse? 
> Or maybe apu-4 and -1, if not all.  I'd expect error msgs on -1 anyway.
they are now available  at:
http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/~danny/pcengines/ 

> 
>> I have p4tcc and throttling explicitly turned off (which should now be the
>> default), but my Sandy Bridge Core i5 still shows:
>> dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2501/35000 2500/35000 2000/26426 1800/23233
>> 1600/20164 1400/17226 1200/14408 1000/11713 800/9140
> 
> All truly available I see on more recent processors.  Certainly not 1/8 
> duty-cycle multipliers as p4tcc and maybe? acpi_throttle (not seen here)
> 
>> The first is really bogus to indicate "turbo" mode.
> 
> Usefully bogus, in that you can flag powerd to (in your case) -M 2500 to 
> prevent it engaging "turbo" mode, as I do on my old Core2Duo, as advised 
> by Warner years ago to avoid overheating on buildworlds and such - but 
> more recent incarnations of "turbo" are supposedly far more functional.
> 
> Admittedly a digression .. mostly coming from wondering about data Karl
> posted in response, indicating different Cx levels available and so used 
> by the latter 3 AP cores, which was news to me.  I'd like to know more, 
> if only for gratuitous curiosity.  Others can tick their TL;DR box :)
> 
>> Temperature is a totally separate issue. It is VERY sensitive to external
>> issue like airflow and position of the CPU in relation to other components
>> in the chassis Also, unless you have a lot of cores, you probably should
>> set both economy_cx_lowest and performance_cx_lowest to Cmax. Economy
>> should default to that, but  performance will not as that can cause issues
>> on systems with large numbers of cores, so is set to C2. Many such system
>> used to disable deeper sleep modes in BIOS, but I am way behind the times
>> and don't know about the current state of affairs. Certainly for systems
>> with 32 or fewer cores, this should not be an issue. In any case, Cx state
>> can sharply impact temperature.
> 
> Indeed.  But as these are low-power devices 

Re: issues with powerd/freq_levels

[Karl Denninger]

On 8/1/2017 12:45, Ian Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:03:27 -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>  > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:48 AM, Ian Smith  wrote:
>  > 
>  > > On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:09:11 +0300, Daniel Braniss wrote:
>  > >
>  > >  > I am trying out PCengines latest apu2 boards, and I just noticed that
>  > > with different Freebsd versions I get
>  > >  > different freq_levels, and so when idling, each box (have 5) has a
>  > > different freq/temperature value, ranging
>  > >  > from 125/69.1C, 600/59.0C to 75/56.0C
>  > >  >
>  > >  > FreeBSD apu-4 11.1-STABLE FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE #5 f565b5a06ab3 (11) 
> tip:
>  > > Mon Jul 31 09:36:33 IDT 2017
>  > >  > apu-4# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
>  > >  > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/980 800/807 600/609
>  > >
>  > > That looks about right.  On a Core2Duo (still on 9.3) I get:
>  > > dev.est.1.freq_settings: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
>  > > dev.est.0.freq_settings: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
>  > > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
>  > > dev.cpu.0.freq: 800
>  > >
>  > > But only because I'd added to /boot/loader.conf:
>  > >
>  > > hint.p4tcc.0.disabled=1
>  > > hint.acpi_throttle.0.disabled=1
>  > >
>  > > which became the defaults sometime, maybe not before 11.0?  Otherwise
>  > > mine would look more similar to the one below, with all 12.5% increments
>  > > in frequency enabled, which doesn't actually save any power at all.
>  > >
>  > >  > FreeBSD apu-5 11.1-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 11.1-PRERELEASE #0 21e9d1ca9b80
>  > > (11) tip: Tue May 30 11:51:48 IDT 2017
>  > >  > apu-5# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
>  > >  > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/966 875/845 800/795 700/695 600/600 
> 525/525
>  > > 450/450 375/375 300/300 225/225 150/150 75/75
>  > >
>  > > Looks like either p4tcc or acpi_throttle is enabled?  See cpufreq(4).
>  > > As above, these don't buy you anything but extra busyness for powerd.
>  > >
>  > > Also noticed that the (nice, low!) milliwatt figures for 1000/800/600
>  > > freqs are a bit different to the -stable one.  Slightly Different model?
>  > >
>  > >  > FreeBSD apu-1 10.3-STABLE FreeBSD 10.3-STABLE #4 267788fd852c (10) 
> tip:
>  > > Tue Jan 10 09:09:00 IST 2017
>  > >  > apu-1# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
>  > >  > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/-1 875/-1 750/-1 625/-1 500/-1 375/-1
>  > > 250/-1 125/-1
>  > >
>  > > And that looks like est(4) isn't enabled/attaching at all .. see dmesg
>  > > on all of these for clues.
>  > >
>  > >  > so, any ideas as to what is going on?
>  > >
>  > > Pure guesswork on experience with older versions, I'm not up to date.
>  > >
>  > 
>  > Very odd. Are all systems running identical CPUs and BIOSes? Identical
>  > loader and sysctl configurations? Look at /var/rn/dmesg.boot for CPU
>  > information. Is EST being detected? It used to be early in the boot
>  > process, but is now fairly late. (In my case, about 2/3 through the
>  > dmesg.boot file.
>
> Hi Kevin, it's been a while ..
>
> Danny, can you put up a verbose boot dmesg.boot of one(?) for a browse? 
> Or maybe apu-4 and -1, if not all.  I'd expect error msgs on -1 anyway.
>
>  > I have p4tcc and throttling explicitly turned off (which should now be the
>  > default), but my Sandy Bridge Core i5 still shows:
>  > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2501/35000 2500/35000 2000/26426 1800/23233
>  > 1600/20164 1400/17226 1200/14408 1000/11713 800/9140
>
> All truly available I see on more recent processors.  Certainly not 1/8 
> duty-cycle multipliers as p4tcc and maybe? acpi_throttle (not seen here)
>
>  > The first is really bogus to indicate "turbo" mode.
>
> Usefully bogus, in that you can flag powerd to (in your case) -M 2500 to 
> prevent it engaging "turbo" mode, as I do on my old Core2Duo, as advised 
> by Warner years ago to avoid overheating on buildworlds and such - but 
> more recent incarnations of "turbo" are supposedly far more functional.
>
> Admittedly a digression .. mostly coming from wondering about data Karl
> posted in response, indicating different Cx levels available and so used 
> by the latter 3 AP cores, which was news to me.  I'd like to know more, 
> if only for gratuitous curiosity.  Others can tick their TL;DR box :)
>
>  > Temperature is a totally separate issue. It is VERY sensitive to external
>  > issue like airflow and position of the CPU in relation to other components
>  > in the chassis Also, unless you have a lot of cores, you probably should
>  > set both economy_cx_lowest and performance_cx_lowest to Cmax. Economy
>  > should default to that, but  performance will not as that can cause issues
>  > on systems with large numbers of cores, so is set to C2. Many such system
>  > used to disable deeper sleep modes in BIOS, but I am way behind the times
>  > and don't know about the current state of affairs. Certainly for systems
>  > with 32 or fewer cores, this should not be an issue. In any case, Cx state
>  > can sharply impact 

Re: issues with powerd/freq_levels

[Ian Smith]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:03:27 -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote:
 > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:48 AM, Ian Smith  wrote:
 > 
 > > On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:09:11 +0300, Daniel Braniss wrote:
 > >
 > >  > I am trying out PCengines latest apu2 boards, and I just noticed that
 > > with different Freebsd versions I get
 > >  > different freq_levels, and so when idling, each box (have 5) has a
 > > different freq/temperature value, ranging
 > >  > from 125/69.1C, 600/59.0C to 75/56.0C
 > >  >
 > >  > FreeBSD apu-4 11.1-STABLE FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE #5 f565b5a06ab3 (11) tip:
 > > Mon Jul 31 09:36:33 IDT 2017
 > >  > apu-4# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
 > >  > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/980 800/807 600/609
 > >
 > > That looks about right.  On a Core2Duo (still on 9.3) I get:
 > > dev.est.1.freq_settings: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
 > > dev.est.0.freq_settings: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
 > > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
 > > dev.cpu.0.freq: 800
 > >
 > > But only because I'd added to /boot/loader.conf:
 > >
 > > hint.p4tcc.0.disabled=1
 > > hint.acpi_throttle.0.disabled=1
 > >
 > > which became the defaults sometime, maybe not before 11.0?  Otherwise
 > > mine would look more similar to the one below, with all 12.5% increments
 > > in frequency enabled, which doesn't actually save any power at all.
 > >
 > >  > FreeBSD apu-5 11.1-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 11.1-PRERELEASE #0 21e9d1ca9b80
 > > (11) tip: Tue May 30 11:51:48 IDT 2017
 > >  > apu-5# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
 > >  > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/966 875/845 800/795 700/695 600/600 525/525
 > > 450/450 375/375 300/300 225/225 150/150 75/75
 > >
 > > Looks like either p4tcc or acpi_throttle is enabled?  See cpufreq(4).
 > > As above, these don't buy you anything but extra busyness for powerd.
 > >
 > > Also noticed that the (nice, low!) milliwatt figures for 1000/800/600
 > > freqs are a bit different to the -stable one.  Slightly Different model?
 > >
 > >  > FreeBSD apu-1 10.3-STABLE FreeBSD 10.3-STABLE #4 267788fd852c (10) tip:
 > > Tue Jan 10 09:09:00 IST 2017
 > >  > apu-1# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
 > >  > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/-1 875/-1 750/-1 625/-1 500/-1 375/-1
 > > 250/-1 125/-1
 > >
 > > And that looks like est(4) isn't enabled/attaching at all .. see dmesg
 > > on all of these for clues.
 > >
 > >  > so, any ideas as to what is going on?
 > >
 > > Pure guesswork on experience with older versions, I'm not up to date.
 > >
 > 
 > Very odd. Are all systems running identical CPUs and BIOSes? Identical
 > loader and sysctl configurations? Look at /var/rn/dmesg.boot for CPU
 > information. Is EST being detected? It used to be early in the boot
 > process, but is now fairly late. (In my case, about 2/3 through the
 > dmesg.boot file.

Hi Kevin, it's been a while ..

Danny, can you put up a verbose boot dmesg.boot of one(?) for a browse? 
Or maybe apu-4 and -1, if not all.  I'd expect error msgs on -1 anyway.

 > I have p4tcc and throttling explicitly turned off (which should now be the
 > default), but my Sandy Bridge Core i5 still shows:
 > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2501/35000 2500/35000 2000/26426 1800/23233
 > 1600/20164 1400/17226 1200/14408 1000/11713 800/9140

All truly available I see on more recent processors.  Certainly not 1/8 
duty-cycle multipliers as p4tcc and maybe? acpi_throttle (not seen here)

 > The first is really bogus to indicate "turbo" mode.

Usefully bogus, in that you can flag powerd to (in your case) -M 2500 to 
prevent it engaging "turbo" mode, as I do on my old Core2Duo, as advised 
by Warner years ago to avoid overheating on buildworlds and such - but 
more recent incarnations of "turbo" are supposedly far more functional.

Admittedly a digression .. mostly coming from wondering about data Karl
posted in response, indicating different Cx levels available and so used 
by the latter 3 AP cores, which was news to me.  I'd like to know more, 
if only for gratuitous curiosity.  Others can tick their TL;DR box :)

 > Temperature is a totally separate issue. It is VERY sensitive to external
 > issue like airflow and position of the CPU in relation to other components
 > in the chassis Also, unless you have a lot of cores, you probably should
 > set both economy_cx_lowest and performance_cx_lowest to Cmax. Economy
 > should default to that, but  performance will not as that can cause issues
 > on systems with large numbers of cores, so is set to C2. Many such system
 > used to disable deeper sleep modes in BIOS, but I am way behind the times
 > and don't know about the current state of affairs. Certainly for systems
 > with 32 or fewer cores, this should not be an issue. In any case, Cx state
 > can sharply impact temperature.

Indeed.  But as these are low-power devices already, it's likely less of 
a concern, but maximising efficiency and minimising stress never hurts.

 > Finally, the last case with power levels of -1 for all frequencies is
 > 

Re: issues with powerd/freq_levels

[Daniel Braniss]

all boards are identical, purchased at the same time.

> On 31 Jul 2017, at 13:48, Ian Smith  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:09:11 +0300, Daniel Braniss wrote:
> 
>> I am trying out PCengines latest apu2 boards, and I just noticed that with 
>> different Freebsd versions I get
>> different freq_levels, and so when idling, each box (have 5) has a different 
>> freq/temperature value, ranging
>> from 125/69.1C, 600/59.0C to 75/56.0C
>> 
>> FreeBSD apu-4 11.1-STABLE FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE #5 f565b5a06ab3 (11) tip: Mon 
>> Jul 31 09:36:33 IDT 2017
>> apu-4# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
>> dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/980 800/807 600/609
> 
> That looks about right.  On a Core2Duo (still on 9.3) I get:
> dev.est.1.freq_settings: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
> dev.est.0.freq_settings: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
> dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
> dev.cpu.0.freq: 800
> 
> But only because I'd added to /boot/loader.conf:
> 
> hint.p4tcc.0.disabled=1
> hint.acpi_throttle.0.disabled=1
> 

the above are in my device.hints, so I assume they now standard.

> which became the defaults sometime, maybe not before 11.0?  Otherwise 
> mine would look more similar to the one below, with all 12.5% increments 
> in frequency enabled, which doesn't actually save any power at all.
> 
>> FreeBSD apu-5 11.1-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 11.1-PRERELEASE #0 21e9d1ca9b80 (11) 
>> tip: Tue May 30 11:51:48 IDT 2017
>> apu-5# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
>> dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/966 875/845 800/795 700/695 600/600 525/525 
>> 450/450 375/375 300/300 225/225 150/150 75/75
> 
> Looks like either p4tcc or acpi_throttle is enabled?  See cpufreq(4).
> As above, these don't buy you anything but extra busyness for powerd.
> 
> Also noticed that the (nice, low!) milliwatt figures for 1000/800/600 
> freqs are a bit different to the -stable one.  Slightly Different model?
> 
>> FreeBSD apu-1 10.3-STABLE FreeBSD 10.3-STABLE #4 267788fd852c (10) tip: Tue 
>> Jan 10 09:09:00 IST 2017
>> apu-1# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
>> dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/-1 875/-1 750/-1 625/-1 500/-1 375/-1 250/-1 
>> 125/-1
> 
> And that looks like est(4) isn't enabled/attaching at all .. see dmesg 
> on all of these for clues.
> 
>> so, any ideas as to what is going on?
> 
> Pure guesswork on experience with older versions, I'm not up to date.
> 
> cheers, Ian

well, since I’m mostly interested in 11.1 at the moment, what you are saying is 
that’s ok,
fine by me, 

thanks,
danny

___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: issues with powerd/freq_levels

[Karl Denninger]

On 7/31/2017 14:03, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:48 AM, Ian Smith  wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:09:11 +0300, Daniel Braniss wrote:
>>
>>  > I am trying out PCengines latest apu2 boards, and I just noticed that
>> with different Freebsd versions I get
>>  > different freq_levels, and so when idling, each box (have 5) has a
>> different freq/temperature value, ranging
>>  > from 125/69.1C, 600/59.0C to 75/56.0C
>>  >
>>  > FreeBSD apu-4 11.1-STABLE FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE #5 f565b5a06ab3 (11) tip:
>> Mon Jul 31 09:36:33 IDT 2017
>>  > apu-4# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
>>  > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/980 800/807 600/609
>>
>> That looks about right.  On a Core2Duo (still on 9.3) I get:
>> dev.est.1.freq_settings: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
>> dev.est.0.freq_settings: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
>> dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
>> dev.cpu.0.freq: 800
>>
>> But only because I'd added to /boot/loader.conf:
>>
>> hint.p4tcc.0.disabled=1
>> hint.acpi_throttle.0.disabled=1
>>
>> which became the defaults sometime, maybe not before 11.0?  Otherwise
>> mine would look more similar to the one below, with all 12.5% increments
>> in frequency enabled, which doesn't actually save any power at all.
>>
>>  > FreeBSD apu-5 11.1-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 11.1-PRERELEASE #0 21e9d1ca9b80
>> (11) tip: Tue May 30 11:51:48 IDT 2017
>>  > apu-5# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
>>  > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/966 875/845 800/795 700/695 600/600 525/525
>> 450/450 375/375 300/300 225/225 150/150 75/75
>>
>> Looks like either p4tcc or acpi_throttle is enabled?  See cpufreq(4).
>> As above, these don't buy you anything but extra busyness for powerd.
>>
>> Also noticed that the (nice, low!) milliwatt figures for 1000/800/600
>> freqs are a bit different to the -stable one.  Slightly Different model?
>>
>>  > FreeBSD apu-1 10.3-STABLE FreeBSD 10.3-STABLE #4 267788fd852c (10) tip:
>> Tue Jan 10 09:09:00 IST 2017
>>  > apu-1# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
>>  > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/-1 875/-1 750/-1 625/-1 500/-1 375/-1
>> 250/-1 125/-1
>>
>> And that looks like est(4) isn't enabled/attaching at all .. see dmesg
>> on all of these for clues.
>>
>>  > so, any ideas as to what is going on?
>>
>> Pure guesswork on experience with older versions, I'm not up to date.
>>
> Very odd. Are all systems running identical CPUs and BIOSes? Identical
> loader and sysctl configurations? Look at /var/rn/dmesg.boot for CPU
> information. Is EST being detected? It used to be early in the boot
> process, but is now fairly late. (In my case, about 2/3 through the
> dmesg.boot file.
>
> I have p4tcc and throttling explicitly turned off (which should now be the
> default), but my Sandy Bridge Core i5 still shows:
> dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2501/35000 2500/35000 2000/26426 1800/23233
> 1600/20164 1400/17226 1200/14408 1000/11713 800/9140
> The first is really bogus to indicate "turbo" mode.
>
> Temperature is a totally separate issue. It is VERY sensitive to external
> issue like airflow and position of the CPU in relation to other components
> in the chassis Also, unless you have a lot of cores, you probably should
> set both economy_cx_lowest and performance_cx_lowest to Cmax. Economy
> should default to that, but  performance will not as that can cause issues
> on systems with large numbers of cores, so is set to C2. Many such system
> used to disable deeper sleep modes in BIOS, but I am way behind the times
> and don't know about the current state of affairs. Certainly for systems
> with 32 or fewer cores, this should not be an issue. In any case, Cx state
> can sharply impact temperature.
>
> Finally, the last case with power levels of -1 for all frequencies is
> probably because the CPU manufacturer (Intel?) has not published this
> information. For a while they were treating this as "proprietary"
> information. Very annoying! It's always something that is not readily
> available. Thi is one reason I suspect your CPUs are not identical.
> --
> Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer
> E-mail: rkober...@gmail.com
> PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683
> ___
> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

I have a very new PCEngines unit here running 11.0-STABLE and this is
what I have in the related sysctls:

$ sysctl -a|grep cpu.0
dev.cpu.0.cx_method: C1/hlt C2/io
dev.cpu.0.cx_usage_counters: 2261969965 3038
dev.cpu.0.cx_usage: 99.99% 0.00% last 798us
dev.cpu.0.cx_lowest: C2
dev.cpu.0.cx_supported: C1/1/0 C2/2/400
dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/924 800/760 600/571
dev.cpu.0.freq: 1000
dev.cpu.0.temperature: 59.2C
dev.cpu.0.%parent: acpi0
dev.cpu.0.%pnpinfo: _HID=none _UID=0
dev.cpu.0.%location: handle=\_PR_.P000
dev.cpu.0.%driver: 

Re: issues with powerd/freq_levels

[Kevin Oberman]

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:48 AM, Ian Smith  wrote:

> On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:09:11 +0300, Daniel Braniss wrote:
>
>  > I am trying out PCengines latest apu2 boards, and I just noticed that
> with different Freebsd versions I get
>  > different freq_levels, and so when idling, each box (have 5) has a
> different freq/temperature value, ranging
>  > from 125/69.1C, 600/59.0C to 75/56.0C
>  >
>  > FreeBSD apu-4 11.1-STABLE FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE #5 f565b5a06ab3 (11) tip:
> Mon Jul 31 09:36:33 IDT 2017
>  > apu-4# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
>  > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/980 800/807 600/609
>
> That looks about right.  On a Core2Duo (still on 9.3) I get:
> dev.est.1.freq_settings: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
> dev.est.0.freq_settings: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
> dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
> dev.cpu.0.freq: 800
>
> But only because I'd added to /boot/loader.conf:
>
> hint.p4tcc.0.disabled=1
> hint.acpi_throttle.0.disabled=1
>
> which became the defaults sometime, maybe not before 11.0?  Otherwise
> mine would look more similar to the one below, with all 12.5% increments
> in frequency enabled, which doesn't actually save any power at all.
>
>  > FreeBSD apu-5 11.1-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 11.1-PRERELEASE #0 21e9d1ca9b80
> (11) tip: Tue May 30 11:51:48 IDT 2017
>  > apu-5# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
>  > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/966 875/845 800/795 700/695 600/600 525/525
> 450/450 375/375 300/300 225/225 150/150 75/75
>
> Looks like either p4tcc or acpi_throttle is enabled?  See cpufreq(4).
> As above, these don't buy you anything but extra busyness for powerd.
>
> Also noticed that the (nice, low!) milliwatt figures for 1000/800/600
> freqs are a bit different to the -stable one.  Slightly Different model?
>
>  > FreeBSD apu-1 10.3-STABLE FreeBSD 10.3-STABLE #4 267788fd852c (10) tip:
> Tue Jan 10 09:09:00 IST 2017
>  > apu-1# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
>  > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/-1 875/-1 750/-1 625/-1 500/-1 375/-1
> 250/-1 125/-1
>
> And that looks like est(4) isn't enabled/attaching at all .. see dmesg
> on all of these for clues.
>
>  > so, any ideas as to what is going on?
>
> Pure guesswork on experience with older versions, I'm not up to date.
>

Very odd. Are all systems running identical CPUs and BIOSes? Identical
loader and sysctl configurations? Look at /var/rn/dmesg.boot for CPU
information. Is EST being detected? It used to be early in the boot
process, but is now fairly late. (In my case, about 2/3 through the
dmesg.boot file.

I have p4tcc and throttling explicitly turned off (which should now be the
default), but my Sandy Bridge Core i5 still shows:
dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2501/35000 2500/35000 2000/26426 1800/23233
1600/20164 1400/17226 1200/14408 1000/11713 800/9140
The first is really bogus to indicate "turbo" mode.

Temperature is a totally separate issue. It is VERY sensitive to external
issue like airflow and position of the CPU in relation to other components
in the chassis Also, unless you have a lot of cores, you probably should
set both economy_cx_lowest and performance_cx_lowest to Cmax. Economy
should default to that, but  performance will not as that can cause issues
on systems with large numbers of cores, so is set to C2. Many such system
used to disable deeper sleep modes in BIOS, but I am way behind the times
and don't know about the current state of affairs. Certainly for systems
with 32 or fewer cores, this should not be an issue. In any case, Cx state
can sharply impact temperature.

Finally, the last case with power levels of -1 for all frequencies is
probably because the CPU manufacturer (Intel?) has not published this
information. For a while they were treating this as "proprietary"
information. Very annoying! It's always something that is not readily
available. Thi is one reason I suspect your CPUs are not identical.
--
Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer
E-mail: rkober...@gmail.com
PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: issues with powerd/freq_levels

[Ian Smith]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:09:11 +0300, Daniel Braniss wrote:

 > I am trying out PCengines latest apu2 boards, and I just noticed that with 
 > different Freebsd versions I get
 > different freq_levels, and so when idling, each box (have 5) has a different 
 > freq/temperature value, ranging
 > from 125/69.1C, 600/59.0C to 75/56.0C
 > 
 > FreeBSD apu-4 11.1-STABLE FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE #5 f565b5a06ab3 (11) tip: Mon 
 > Jul 31 09:36:33 IDT 2017
 > apu-4# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
 > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/980 800/807 600/609

That looks about right.  On a Core2Duo (still on 9.3) I get:
dev.est.1.freq_settings: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
dev.est.0.freq_settings: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000
dev.cpu.0.freq: 800

But only because I'd added to /boot/loader.conf:

hint.p4tcc.0.disabled=1
hint.acpi_throttle.0.disabled=1

which became the defaults sometime, maybe not before 11.0?  Otherwise 
mine would look more similar to the one below, with all 12.5% increments 
in frequency enabled, which doesn't actually save any power at all.

 > FreeBSD apu-5 11.1-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 11.1-PRERELEASE #0 21e9d1ca9b80 (11) 
 > tip: Tue May 30 11:51:48 IDT 2017
 > apu-5# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
 > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/966 875/845 800/795 700/695 600/600 525/525 
 > 450/450 375/375 300/300 225/225 150/150 75/75

Looks like either p4tcc or acpi_throttle is enabled?  See cpufreq(4).
As above, these don't buy you anything but extra busyness for powerd.

Also noticed that the (nice, low!) milliwatt figures for 1000/800/600 
freqs are a bit different to the -stable one.  Slightly Different model?

 > FreeBSD apu-1 10.3-STABLE FreeBSD 10.3-STABLE #4 267788fd852c (10) tip: Tue 
 > Jan 10 09:09:00 IST 2017
 > apu-1# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
 > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/-1 875/-1 750/-1 625/-1 500/-1 375/-1 250/-1 
 > 125/-1

And that looks like est(4) isn't enabled/attaching at all .. see dmesg 
on all of these for clues.

 > so, any ideas as to what is going on?

Pure guesswork on experience with older versions, I'm not up to date.

cheers, Ian
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

issues with powerd/freq_levels

[Daniel Braniss]

I am trying out PCengines latest apu2 boards, and I just noticed that with 
different Freebsd versions I get
different freq_levels, and so when idling, each box (have 5) has a different
freq/temperature value, ranging
from 125/69.1C, 600/59.0C to 75/56.0C

FreeBSD apu-4 11.1-STABLE FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE #5 f565b5a06ab3 (11) tip: Mon Jul 
31 09:36:33 IDT 2017
apu-4# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/980 800/807 600/609

FreeBSD apu-5 11.1-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 11.1-PRERELEASE #0 21e9d1ca9b80 (11) tip: 
Tue May 30 11:51:48 IDT 2017
apu-5# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/966 875/845 800/795 700/695 600/600 525/525 450/450 
375/375 300/300 225/225 150/150 75/75


FreeBSD apu-1 10.3-STABLE FreeBSD 10.3-STABLE #4 267788fd852c (10) tip: Tue Jan 
10 09:09:00 IST 2017
apu-1# sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq_levels
dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1000/-1 875/-1 750/-1 625/-1 500/-1 375/-1 250/-1 125/-1

so, any ideas as to what is going on?

thanks,
danny

___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"