[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0gueSnaci601OkVq9_Ui09k8EsByRL08tFkzDoDGJpp6g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 18:41:20 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: Jens Glathe <jens.glathe@...schoolsolutions.biz>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>, Steev Klimaszewski <steev@...i.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, regressions@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: cpufreq/thermal regression in 6.10
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 5:53 PM Jens Glathe
<jens.glathe@...schoolsolutions.biz> wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> unfortunately I experienced the issue with the fix applied. I had to
> revert this and the original commit to get back to normal behaviour. My
> system (also Lenovo Thinkpad X13s) uses the schedutil governor, the
> behaviour is as described from Steev and Johan. The full throttling
> happened during a package build and left the performance cores at 940800.
So can you please test the attached patch, on top of the fix?
View attachment "thermal-gov_step_wise-distangle.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (1407 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists