| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20100119125345.e5d1c6a8.skraw@ithnet.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:53:45 +0100 From: Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@...net.com> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: kernel cpufreq on intel core2quad Dear all, lately I tried to make use of the CPUFreq governor "ondemand". I tried two boxes, one with Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6700 @ 2.66GHz, another with Intel (R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q9300 @ 2.50GHz both running kernel 2.6.32.4. At first I thought there is something wrong with the second one (Q9300). It showed the following in /proc/cpuinfo: processor : 3 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 23 model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q9300 @ 2.50GHz stepping : 7 cpu MHz : 2000.000 cache size : 3072 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 4 core id : 3 cpu cores : 4 apicid : 3 initial apicid : 3 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 10 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good aperfmperf pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm sse4_1 lahf_lm tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority bogomips : 4987.51 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: All four cores are the same, so I leave the others for now. As you can see it shows a cpu MHz of 2000.000. This looked suspicious to me, as the Q6700 showed this: processor : 3 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 15 model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6700 @ 2.66GHz stepping : 11 cpu MHz : 600.000 cache size : 4096 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 4 core id : 3 cpu cores : 4 apicid : 3 initial apicid : 3 fdiv_bug : no hlt_bug : no f00f_bug : no coma_bug : no fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 10 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe nx lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts aperfmperf pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm lahf_lm tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority bogomips : 5333.69 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: Which means only 600 MHz in idle on Q6700 compared to 2000 MHz on Q9300. So I turned on debugging and that left me puzzled. See this on Q6700: kernel: acpi-cpufreq: acpi_cpufreq_init kernel: acpi-cpufreq: acpi_cpufreq_early_init kernel: cpufreq-core: trying to register driver acpi-cpufreq kernel: cpufreq-core: adding CPU 0 kernel: acpi-cpufreq: acpi_cpufreq_cpu_init kernel: acpi-cpufreq: HARDWARE addr space kernel: freq-table: table entry 0: 1000000 kHz, 0 index kernel: freq-table: table entry 1: 800000 kHz, 1 index kernel: freq-table: table entry 2: 600000 kHz, 2 index kernel: acpi-cpufreq: get_cur_freq_on_cpu (0) kernel: acpi-cpufreq: get_cur_val = 100665893 kernel: acpi-cpufreq: cur freq = 1000000 kernel: acpi-cpufreq: CPU0 - ACPI performance management activated. kernel: acpi-cpufreq: *P0: 1000 MHz, 31000 mW, 10 uS kernel: acpi-cpufreq: P1: 800 MHz, 22000 mW, 10 uS kernel: acpi-cpufreq: P2: 600 MHz, 13000 mW, 10 uS kernel: freq-table: setting show_table for cpu 0 to f71ca7e0 kernel: cpufreq-core: setting new policy for CPU 0: 600000 - 1000000 kHz kernel: acpi-cpufreq: acpi_cpufreq_verify kernel: freq-table: request for verification of policy (600000 - 1000000 kHz) for cpu 0 kernel: freq-table: verification lead to (600000 - 1000000 kHz) for cpu 0 kernel: acpi-cpufreq: acpi_cpufreq_verify kernel: freq-table: request for verification of policy (600000 - 1000000 kHz) for cpu 0 kernel: freq-table: verification lead to (600000 - 1000000 kHz) for cpu 0 kernel: cpufreq-core: new min and max freqs are 600000 - 1000000 kHz kernel: cpufreq-core: governor switch kernel: cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 1 kernel: cpufreq-core: governor: change or update limits kernel: cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 3 kernel: cpufreq-core: initialization complete And on Q9300: kernel: acpi-cpufreq: acpi_cpufreq_init kernel: acpi-cpufreq: acpi_cpufreq_early_init kernel: cpufreq-core: trying to register driver acpi-cpufreq kernel: cpufreq-core: adding CPU 0 kernel: acpi-cpufreq: acpi_cpufreq_cpu_init kernel: acpi-cpufreq: HARDWARE addr space kernel: freq-table: table entry 0: 2500000 kHz, 0 index kernel: freq-table: table entry 1: 2000000 kHz, 1 index kernel: acpi-cpufreq: get_cur_freq_on_cpu (0) kernel: acpi-cpufreq: get_cur_val = 100681504 kernel: acpi-cpufreq: cur freq = 2500000 kernel: acpi-cpufreq: CPU0 - ACPI performance management activated. kernel: acpi-cpufreq: *P0: 2500 MHz, 35000 mW, 10 uS kernel: acpi-cpufreq: P1: 2000 MHz, 16000 mW, 10 uS kernel: freq-table: setting show_table for cpu 0 to ffff88020d80cb00 kernel: cpufreq-core: setting new policy for CPU 0: 2000000 - 2500000 kHz kernel: acpi-cpufreq: acpi_cpufreq_verify kernel: freq-table: request for verification of policy (2000000 - 2500000 kHz) for cpu 0 kernel: freq-table: verification lead to (2000000 - 2500000 kHz) for cpu 0 kernel: acpi-cpufreq: acpi_cpufreq_verify kernel: freq-table: request for verification of policy (2000000 - 2500000 kHz) for cpu 0 kernel: freq-table: verification lead to (2000000 - 2500000 kHz) for cpu 0 kernel: cpufreq-core: new min and max freqs are 2000000 - 2500000 kHz kernel: cpufreq-core: governor switch kernel: cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 1 kernel: cpufreq-core: governor: change or update limits kernel: cpufreq-core: __cpufreq_governor for CPU 0, event 3 kernel: cpufreq-core: initialization complete So, now it looks like the Q6700 is in fact somehow wrong setting max freq only to 1000 MHz, though being capable of 2660 MHz. The Q9300 in comparison shows a correct max freq of 2500 MHz, but seems only being able to slow down to 2000 MHz. Both boxes show correct cpu freq in /proc/cpuinfo if using the performance governor btw. Am I right that the Q6700 setup has indeed severe problems, and that the Q9300 cannot go below 2000 MHz? -- Regards, Stephan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists