@Colin: I agree with all of that.

Our kernel-side default is not powersave, but performance, across
generic and oem, at the very least:

$ grep CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_.*=y /boot/config-5.*

We used to set that to powersave (and ondemand on non-pstate) in
ondemand.service, but have since removed the service in groovy.

I believe the default governor kernel-side outside Ubuntu is usually
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_ONDEMAND, which translates to ondemand pre-
pstates, and powersave on pstates (compare Fedora), whereas Enterprise
systems usually pick PERFORMANCE too (compare RHEL)

- probably because most distributions focus on normal end users and
enterprise on server and workstation. We don't have that distinction of
course, so I'm not sure what the best way out is - default to
powersave/ondemand and make server installer write performance - or vice
versa default to performance and make ubiquity configure powersave for

You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to systemd in Ubuntu.

  Bring back ondemand.service or switch kernel default governor for
  pstate - pstate now defaults to performance governor

Status in linux package in Ubuntu:
Status in systemd package in Ubuntu:
Status in linux source package in Groovy:
Status in systemd source package in Groovy:

Bug description:
  In a recent merge from Debian we lost ondemand.service, meaning all
  CPUs now run in Turbo all the time when idle, which is clearly

  The discussion in bug 1806012 seems misleading, focusing on p-state vs
  other drivers, when in fact, the script actually set the default
  governor for the pstate driver on platforms that use pstate.
  Everything below only looks at systems that use pstate.

  pstate has two governors: performance and powerstate. performance runs
  CPU at maximum frequency constantly, and powersave can be configured
  using various energy profiles energy profiles:

  - performance
  - balanced performance
  - balanced power
  - power

  It defaults to balanced performance, I think, but I'm not sure.

  Whether performance governor is faster than powersave governor is not
  even clear.
  cpufreq&num=5 benchmarked them, but did not benchmark the individual
  energy profiles.

  For a desktop/laptop, the expected behavior is the powersave governor
  with balanced_performance on AC and balanced_power on battery.

  I don't know about servers or VMs, but the benchmark series seems to
  indicate it does not really matter much performance wise.

  I think most other distributions configure their kernels to use the
  powersave governor by default, whereas we configure it to use the
  performance governor and then switch it later in the boot to get the
  maximum performance during bootup. It's not clear to me that's
  actually useful.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:

Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to     : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Reply via email to