[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1606161636530.2744@macbook-air>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 16:44:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
To: Huang Rui <ray.huang@....com>
cc: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>,
Jacob Shin <jacob.w.shin@...il.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org,
Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
Aravind Gopalakrishnan <Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@....com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [REDO PATCH v7] perf/x86/amd/power: Add AMD accumulated power
reporting mechanism
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016, Huang Rui wrote:
> > 1. In theory this should also work on an amd fam16h model 30h
> > processor too, correct? The current code limits things to fam15h
> > even though the fam16mod30h has all the proper cpuid flags.
> >
>
> I was told this feature would be supported on fam15h 60h, 70h and
> later processors before. Just checked the fam16h model 30h BKDG, yes,
> it should be also supported. But I didn't test that platform, if you
> confirm it works in your side. We can enable it.
I can confirm I get power readings on my fam16hmod30h board once I apply a
trivial patch to the driver. I'll send the patch in a separate e-mail.
> PTSC's frequency is about 100Mhz, it shouldn't be overflow.
That's what I thought. I'm trying to read the value using the /dev/msr
interface from userspace and I get weird results.
i.e.:
Jx: read 62d299b84
PTSC MSR: read 72fe92
sleep 5ms
Jy: read 631b453b9
PTSC MSR: read 46b25
this happens about half the time (PTSC going backwards). Though
admittedly the problem could somehow be in the MSR code I'm using.
> mWatts are for processor power not system power. Below data is
> calculated on fam15h model 60h which is low power platform. Even
> though the method has a minor mistake, the processor power should be
> in mWatts field.
I have an actual wall-mounted power meter hooked up to my system and the
difference from idle to all-cores-busy is 20W, so I would think that that
the results we find with perf should be >1W at least.
Vince
Powered by blists - more mailing lists