From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752260Ab1GVQKp (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jul 2011 12:10:45 -0400 Received: from oproxy4-pub.bluehost.com ([69.89.21.11]:42169 "HELO oproxy4-pub.bluehost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751618Ab1GVQKo (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jul 2011 12:10:44 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=virtuousgeek.org; h=Received:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:X-Mailer:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Identified-User; b=t5MU8xRcmBoMpJiUH/IL/uxSGFVRAAQ3MYx8ZRhrbwxKFzdrq/56bR7grn4F576xPbLcmDOptUYS+jcURImXGA4hVwt29zrkRFUfPYYwQJN8e0gVvH19qEwnyNZoRz3I; Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 09:10:37 -0700 From: Jesse Barnes To: Olaf Freyer Cc: Florian Mickler , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chris Wilson , Keith Packard , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: Erroneous package power limit notification since kernel 2.6.39 Message-ID: <20110722091037.131e5dbb@jbarnes-desktop> In-Reply-To: <4E0C1995.20009@gmx.net> References: <4DD9092A.4080507@gmx.net> <20110626182725.3f2eac8d@schatten.dmk.lab> <4E0A3DB1.8000202@gmx.net> <20110628135936.297293b4@jbarnes-desktop> <4E0A4319.6040309@gmx.net> <20110628141831.55502d76@jbarnes-desktop> <4E0A4F56.90806@gmx.net> <20110628150644.14805e83@jbarnes-desktop> <4E0C1995.20009@gmx.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.22.0; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Identified-User: {10642:box514.bluehost.com:virtuous:virtuousgeek.org} {sentby:smtp auth 67.161.37.189 authed with jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org} Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:37:09 +0200 Olaf Freyer wrote: > Am 29.06.2011 00:06, schrieb Jesse Barnes: > > On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 00:01:58 +0200 > > Olaf Freyer wrote: > > > >> Am 28.06.2011 23:18, schrieb Jesse Barnes: > >>> Ok interesting, didn't realize X startup was so GPU intensive. :) > >>> > >>> The patch you reverted will definitely cause the GPU to ramp up its > >>> frequency much faster than before, but it sounds like on your system > >>> you might also see it with the revert if you run something GPU > >>> intensive like nexuiz. > >>> > >>> The CPU (and by extension the GPU) will take care of itself though; if > >>> things get too hot or over power, it will clock throttle to keep itself > >>> in a safe range. > >> I also see the message alot during my daily average usage of my computer > >> (just using Firefox, Thunderbird and IntelliJ) - seeing things like > >> CPU3: Package power limit notification (total events = 90809) > >> after a normal day in the office became normal since 2.6.39. > >> > >> I just gave nexuiz a try for about 30 minutes with the reversal patch > >> applied - > >> and not a single message appeared in my logs. > > Sounds like with the patch reverted we can't drive your GPU and CPU > > hard enough to generate the messages. Not sure if that's a good thing > > or a bad thing though... > > > I'm not sure either. I saw a single notification event yesterday while > in office - > previously I would have recieved 70000-90000 during that timeframe. > I consider the pure amount of notifications unsettling - and in case of > some > "real" issue it might even get lost inbetween those notifications. > > Maybe there is a possible compromise between the situation before and > after the patch? I'm willing to lose a few percent of GPU performance just > for the sake of getting lost of those notification events... Yeah we can probably tune these values a bit better... I'll see about doing that. We want to maximize performance across a variety of workloads, but not hit the power limit so hard even for basic stuff... -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center