From: "Doug Smythies" <dsmythies@telus.net> To: "'Srinivas Pandruvada'" <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> Cc: "'Len Brown'" <len.brown@intel.com>, "'Peter Zijlstra'" <peterz@infradead.org>, "'Giovanni Gherdovich'" <ggherdovich@suse.cz>, "'Francisco Jerez'" <francisco.jerez.plata@intel.com>, "'Linux PM'" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, "'Rafael J. Wysocki'" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> Subject: RE: cpufreq: intel_pstate: HWP mode issue Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2020 07:41:04 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <000b01d65535$d148b8c0$73da2a40$@net> (raw) In-Reply-To: On 2020.06.30 11:41 Doug Smythies wrote: > > Hi Srinivas, > > O.K. let's try this again, starting a new thread, with address list similar to a few weeks ago. > I believe I have untangled my multiple issues, such that this e-mail should be only about > the single issue of HWP capable processors incorrectly deciding to lower the CPU frequency > under some conditions. Also, my previous assertion as to the issue was indeed incorrect. > > I now: > . never use x86_energy_perf_policy. > . For HWP disabled: never change from active to passive or via versa, but rather do it via boot. > . after boot always check and reset the various power limit log bits that are set. > . never compile the kernel (well, until after any tests), which will set those bits again. > . never run prime95 high heat torture test, which will set those bits again. > . Note that the tests done for this e-mail never ever set those bits again. > . Invented an entirely new way to manifest, demonstrate, and exploit the issue (also mentioned June > 6th). > . All tests were repeated on another HWP capable computer, so a i5-9600K and a i5-6200U. > > New method (old was periodic workflow): > > Long busy, short gap, busy but taking loop time samples so as to estimate CPU frequency. > I am calling it an inverse impulse response test. > > Assertion: > > If the short sleep is somehow simultaneous with some sort of 5.0 millisecond (200 Hertz) > periodic event (either in HWP itself, or via the driver, I am unable to determine which, > but think it is inside the black box that is HWP), I have been attempting to characterise the "black box" that is HWP. In terms of system response verses EPP, I only observe the HWP loop time as the response variable. 0 <= EPP <= 1 : My test can not measure loop time. 2 <= EPP <= 39 : HWP servo loop time 2 milliseconds 40 <= EPP <= 55 : HWP servo loop time 3 milliseconds 56 <= EPP <= 79 : HWP servo loop time 4 milliseconds 80 <= EPP <= 133 : HWP servo loop time 5 milliseconds 134 <= EPP <= 143 : HWP servo loop time 6 milliseconds 144 <= EPP <= 154 : HWP servo loop time 7 milliseconds 155 <= EPP <= 175 : HWP servo loop time 8 milliseconds 176 <= EPP <= 255 : HWP servo loop time 9 milliseconds If there are other system response differences within those groups, I haven't been able to detect them, but would be grateful for any further insight. Otherwise, in future, I do not see a need to test anything other than 9 values of EPP, one from each group. > then there is a possibility that the > CPU frequency will drop significantly and will take an excessive amount of time to recover. > Frequency step ups are exactly on 5.0 millisecond boundaries +/- the short gap time. > > . The probability is somewhat inconsistent and a function of whatever else the computer is doing. > . The time to recover is a function of EPP, and if EPP is low enough my test never fails. > . These tests were all done with default settings. > . The "5.0" mSec is only for those default settings, it actually depends on EPP. > . Crude step boundaries, mSec: EPP=32, 2; EPP=64, 4; EPP=128, 5.00; EPP=196, 9 Now fully understood, as listed above. > . High level: i5-9600K: 2453 tests, 60 failures, 2.45% fail rate. (HWP - powersave) > . High level: i5-6200U: 4134 tests, 128 failures, 3.1% fail rate. (HWP - powersave) > . Low level (capture waveforms): i5-9600K: 1842 captured failure waveforms. See graph. > . Low level (capture waveforms): i5-6200U: 458 captured failure waveforms. See graph. > . Verify acpi-cpufreq/ondemand works fine: i5-9600K: 8975 tests. 0 failures. > . Verify acpi-cpufreq/ondemand works fine: i5-6200U: 8575 tests. 0 failures. The tests were all done using the teo idle governor. While the menu governor does not fail for this particular test, it fails in other scenarios. I have yet to find a failure scenario when idle state 2 is disabled. I have captured and analyzed about 400 megabytes of trace data, and have not been able to isolate an exact correlation. > > The short gap was 842 uSeconds for all these tests, and for no particular reason. > > While I have not re-done the bounds investigation, I have no reason to doubt > my previous work, re-stated below: > > > Gap definition: > > lower limit not known, but < 747 uSeconds. > > Upper limit is between 952 and 955 uSeconds (there will be some overhead uncertainties). The only new information I have is that the upper bound is bigger. > > Must be preceded by busy time spanning a couple of HWP sampling boundaries > > or jiffy boundaries or something (I don't actually know how HWP does stuff). > > Rather than point to graphs, which nobody seems to look at, they are attached, > and so might get striped for some of you. > > ... Doug > > Addendum: Some of the MSRs you have requested in the past: > > i5-9600K (HWP - powersave after test): > > root@s18:/home/doug# /home/doug/c/msr-decoder > 8.) 0x198: IA32_PERF_STATUS : CPU 0-5 : 8 : 8 : 8 : 8 : 8 : 8 : > B.) 0x770: IA32_PM_ENABLE: 1 : HWP enable > 1.) 0x19C: IA32_THERM_STATUS: 88480000 > 2.) 0x1AA: MSR_MISC_PWR_MGMT: 401CC0 EIST enabled Coordination enabled OOB Bit 8 reset OOB Bit 18 > reset > 3.) 0x1B1: IA32_PACKAGE_THERM_STATUS: 88460000 > 4.) 0x64F: MSR_CORE_PERF_LIMIT_REASONS: 0 > A.) 0x1FC: MSR_POWER_CTL: 3C005D : C1E disable : EEO disable : RHO disable > 5.) 0x771: IA32_HWP_CAPABILITIES (performance): 108252E : high 46 : guaranteed 37 : efficient 8 : > lowest 1 > 6.) 0x774: IA32_HWP_REQUEST: CPU 0-5 : > raw: 80002E08 : 80002E08 : 80002E08 : 80002E08 : 80002E08 : 80002E08 : > min: 8 : 8 : 8 : 8 : 8 : 8 : > max: 46 : 46 : 46 : 46 : 46 : 46 : > des: 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : > epp: 128 : 128 : 128 : 128 : 128 : 128 : > act: 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : > 7.) 0x777: IA32_HWP_STATUS: 0 : high 0 : guaranteed 0 : efficient 0 : lowest 0 > > i5-9600K (no HWP - acpi-cpufreq/ondemand after test): > > root@s18:/home/doug/c# /home/doug/c/msr-decoder > 8.) 0x198: IA32_PERF_STATUS : CPU 0-5 : 8 : 8 : 8 : 8 : 8 : 8 : > B.) 0x770: IA32_PM_ENABLE: 0 : HWP disable > 9.) 0x199: IA32_PERF_CTL : CPU 0-5 : 8 : 8 : 8 : 8 : 8 : 8 : > C.) 0x1B0: IA32_ENERGY_PERF_BIAS: CPU 0-5 : 6 : 6 : 6 : 6 : 6 : 6 : > 1.) 0x19C: IA32_THERM_STATUS: 88480000 > 2.) 0x1AA: MSR_MISC_PWR_MGMT: 401CC0 EIST enabled Coordination enabled OOB Bit 8 reset OOB Bit 18 > reset > 3.) 0x1B1: IA32_PACKAGE_THERM_STATUS: 88460000 > 4.) 0x64F: MSR_CORE_PERF_LIMIT_REASONS: 0 > A.) 0x1FC: MSR_POWER_CTL: 3C005D : C1E disable : EEO disable : RHO disable > > i5-6200U (HWP - powersave after test): > > 8.) 0x198: IA32_PERF_STATUS : CPU 0-3 : 19 : 19 : 19 : 19 : > B.) 0x770: IA32_PM_ENABLE: 1 : HWP enable > 1.) 0x19C: IA32_THERM_STATUS: 88430000 > 2.) 0x1AA: MSR_MISC_PWR_MGMT: 4018C0 EIST enabled Coordination enabled OOB Bit 8 reset OOB Bit 18 > reset > 3.) 0x1B1: IA32_PACKAGE_THERM_STATUS: 88420000 > 4.) 0x64F: MSR_CORE_PERF_LIMIT_REASONS: 0 > A.) 0x1FC: MSR_POWER_CTL: 24005D : C1E disable : EEO enable : RHO enable > 5.) 0x771: IA32_HWP_CAPABILITIES (performance): 105171C : high 28 : guaranteed 23 : efficient 5 : > lowest 1 > 6.) 0x774: IA32_HWP_REQUEST: CPU 0-3 : > raw: 80001B04 : 80001B04 : 80001B04 : 80001B04 : > min: 4 : 4 : 4 : 4 : > max: 27 : 27 : 27 : 27 : > des: 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : > epp: 128 : 128 : 128 : 128 : > act: 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : > 7.) 0x777: IA32_HWP_STATUS: 4 : high 4 : guaranteed 0 : efficient 0 : lowest 0 > > i5-6200U (no HWP - acpi-cpufreq/ondemand after test): > > 8.) 0x198: IA32_PERF_STATUS : CPU 0-3 : 23 : 23 : 23 : 23 : > B.) 0x770: IA32_PM_ENABLE: 0 : HWP disable > 9.) 0x199: IA32_PERF_CTL : CPU 0-3 : 11 : 5 : 5 : 5 : > C.) 0x1B0: IA32_ENERGY_PERF_BIAS: CPU 0-3 : 6 : 6 : 6 : 6 : > 1.) 0x19C: IA32_THERM_STATUS: 88440000 > 2.) 0x1AA: MSR_MISC_PWR_MGMT: 4018C0 EIST enabled Coordination enabled OOB Bit 8 reset OOB Bit 18 > reset > 3.) 0x1B1: IA32_PACKAGE_THERM_STATUS: 88430000 > 4.) 0x64F: MSR_CORE_PERF_LIMIT_REASONS: 0 > A.) 0x1FC: MSR_POWER_CTL: 24005D : C1E disable : EEO enable : RHO enable
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-08 14:41 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-05-26 18:20 [RFC/RFT][PATCH] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Accept passive mode with HWP enabled Rafael J. Wysocki 2020-05-31 16:39 ` Doug Smythies 2020-05-31 16:54 ` Srinivas Pandruvada 2020-05-31 18:06 ` Doug Smythies 2020-05-31 18:59 ` Srinivas Pandruvada 2020-05-31 19:28 ` Srinivas Pandruvada 2020-05-31 21:38 ` Doug Smythies 2020-06-30 19:10 ` cpufreq: intel_pstate: HWP mode issue Doug Smythies 2020-07-08 14:41 ` Doug Smythies [this message] 2020-07-08 14:54 ` srinivas pandruvada 2020-07-08 15:39 ` Doug Smythies 2020-08-02 14:36 ` Doug Smythies 2020-08-02 18:18 ` Srinivas Pandruvada 2020-12-17 16:58 ` Doug Smythies 2020-05-31 17:15 ` [RFC/RFT][PATCH] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Accept passive mode with HWP enabled Doug Smythies 2020-06-06 15:21 ` Doug Smythies 2020-06-06 15:21 ` Doug Smythies
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to='000b01d65535$d148b8c0$73da2a40$@net' \ --to=dsmythies@telus.net \ --cc=francisco.jerez.plata@intel.com \ --cc=ggherdovich@suse.cz \ --cc=len.brown@intel.com \ --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=peterz@infradead.org \ --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \ --cc=srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com \ --subject='RE: cpufreq: intel_pstate: HWP mode issue' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.