[cc: some more people]
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I have a box running 3.9.4. For a few hundred ms, all packages and
> cores* exceeded their power limits, and then they all came back to
> normal.
>
> Since then, turbo boost went away.
>
> The first thing I tried was writing 0 to msr 0x19C to clear the
> throttling "log" bit. The bit was clear, but still no turbo. (I only
> did this on one package to avoid destroying information.)
>
> I have the performance governor set, so there are never any
> software-initiated performance transitions. As an experiment, I
> switched core 0 to powersave (aka very low frequency) and then back to
> performance. The entire package's turbo came back. I did the same
> thing to the cores on package 1 (all of them, sorry), and that
> package's turbo boost came back.
>
> Does the kernel need to reprogram CPU frequencies after thermal/power
> throttling conditions clear?
>
> My CPUs are:
>
> processor : 31
> vendor_id : GenuineIntel
> cpu family : 6
> model : 45
> model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2690 0 @ 2.90GHz
> stepping : 7
> microcode : 0x710
>
>
> * Slight lie here. CPU18 exceeded core limit but not power limit.
I got another power-limit-exceeded warning, but this one didn't kill Turbo.
This problem might be more widespread than people would notice,
because the log line was removed by:
commit c81147483e525e4a471d581877d7d634591246e1
Author: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue May 21 15:35:16 2013 -0400
x86 thermal: Delete power-limit-notification console messages
and if the only symptom is that, under certain workloads, turbo goes
away until the system is rebooted or cpufreq is manually twiddled,
people might not notice.
--Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
