Re: v4.8-rc1: thinkpad x60: running at low frequency even during kernel build

["Pandruvada, Srinivas" <srinivas.pandruvada@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 2016-11-05 at 14:37 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > 
> > > So we seem to have thermal or ACPI regression in v4.9-rc3.
> > > 
> > It is possible. Can you add either add printk
> > in acpi_processor_ppc_has_changed() or use ftrace and see do you
> > get to
> > these functions
> > 
> > acpi_processor_ppc_init()
> > acpi_processor_ppc_has_changed()
> > acpi_processor_ppc_notifier()
> > 
> > ?
> 
> Yes, these seem to be called. Here's the log:

Try this

1. Either enable dyndebug or add 

#define DEBUG 1 
at the top of acpi-cpufreq.c


2.

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c
b/drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c
index bb01dea..6074995 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c
@@ -94,9 +94,14 @@ static int acpi_processor_ppc_notifier(struct
notifier_block *nb,
 
        ppc = (unsigned int)pr->performance_platform_limit;
 
+       printk(KERN_ERR "ppc = %d\n", ppc);
+
        if (ppc >= pr->performance->state_count)
                goto out;
 
+       printk(KERN_ERR "ppc = %d freq-limit %d\n", ppc, pr-
>performance->states[ppc].
+                                     core_frequency * 1000);
+
        cpufreq_verify_within_limits(policy, 0,
                                     pr->performance->states[ppc].
                                     core_frequency * 1000);

Thanks,
Srinivas��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{�����ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f