lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Unified tracing buffer
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2008, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>> 2.00GHz is the maximum(model) frequency. And 'cpu MHz' means
>> current frequency. (yep, now I'm using cpufreq)
>> Anyway, when I measured TSC drift, I killed cpuspeed service and
>> fixed freq to 2000. ;-)
>
> Ahh. I have an idea..
>
> Maybe that thing does thermal throttling?
>
> Fixing the frequency at the highest setting is actually one of the worst
> things you can do, because if the device is thermally limited, it will
> still do the whole throttling thing, but now it won't do it by changing
> the frequency any more, it will do it by essentially forxing the external
> frequency down.
>
> And that is going to be *very* inefficient. You really really don't want
> that. Your performance will actually be _worse_ than if the CPU went to a
> lower frequency. And it might explain the unreliable TSC too, because I
> suspect constant TSC is really constant only wrt the bus clock to the CPU.
>
> The termal throttling thing is a "protect the CPU from overheating" last
> ditch effort, and because it doesn't lower voltage, it isn't actually at
> all as efficient at saving power (and thus cooling the CPU) as a real
> frequency change event would be.
>
> And fixing the frequency to the highest frequency in a tight laptop
> enclosure is the best way to force that behavior (in contrast - in a
> desktop system with sufficient cooling, it's usually not a problem at all
> to just say "run at highest frequency").
>
> And btw, that also explains why you had so *big* changes in frequency: the
> throttling I think happens with a 1/8 duty cycle thing, iirc.
>
> It's supposed to be very rare with Core 2. Thermal throttling was quite
> common with the P4 one, and was the main overheating protection initially.
> These days, you should only see it for really badly designed devices that
> simply don't have enough thermal cooling, but if the design calls for
> mostly running at low frequency because it's some thing-and-light notebook
> with insufficient cooling (or some thick-and-heavy thing that is just
> total crap), and you force it to always run at full speed, I can imagine
> it kicking in to protect the CPU.
>
> It's obviously also going to be much easier to see if the ambient
> temperature is high. If you want to get best peformance, take one of those
> compressed-air spray-cans, and spray on the laptop with the can held
> upside down (the can will generally tell you _not_ to do that, because
> then you'll get the liquid itself rather than gas, but that's what you
> want for cooling).
>
> So if you can test this, try it with
> (a) cpufreq at a fixed _low_ value (to not cause overheating)
> (b) with the spray-can cooling the thing and cpufreq at a fixed high
> value
> and see if the TSC is constant then.

Hi Linus,

Thank you for your advice. I tested it again according your advice,
I did:
- service cpuspeed stop
- echo 1000000 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_setspeed
and checked /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq is
1000000.
- echo 1 > /proc/acpi/thermal_zone/THM/polling_frequency
- cooling with spray-can :)
- cat /proc/acpi/thermal_zone/THM/temperature
temperature: 39 C

and ran the test.
---
p0: c:1107576, ns:990280 ratio:111
p0: c:1805640, ns:1008787 ratio:178
p0: c:1998324, ns:1000127 ratio:199
p0: c:946380, ns:990280 ratio:95
p0: c:871728, ns:1000267 ratio:87
p0: c:1807380, ns:1007949 ratio:179
p0: c:1784808, ns:1000127 ratio:178
p0: c:1768488, ns:991676 ratio:178
p0: c:1802292, ns:1008299 ratio:178
p0: c:1787088, ns:1000406 ratio:178
p0: c:1999176, ns:1000896 ratio:199
p0: c:881364, ns:991956 ratio:88
p0: c:1802712, ns:1008019 ratio:178
p0: c:1787088, ns:998590 ratio:178
---
this seems not so stable yet. :-(

After test I checked temperature again.
# cat /proc/acpi/thermal_zone/THM/temperature
temperature: 39 C

Hmm, 39 C is not so high. I wouldn't be surprised even if this
is an individual product bug. Anyway, currently, Linux itself
works well on this laptop with hpet.:-)

Thank you,


>
> Linus

--
Masami Hiramatsu

Software Engineer
Hitachi Computer Products (America) Inc.
Software Solutions Division

e-mail: mhiramat@redhat.com



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-09-23 19:09    [W:0.178 / U:0.556 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site