From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Sat Nov 26 13:17:21 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62F2AC567FC for ; Sat, 26 Nov 2016 13:17:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Received: from sola.nimnet.asn.au (paqi.nimnet.asn.au [115.70.110.159]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF9F1805; Sat, 26 Nov 2016 13:17:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sola.nimnet.asn.au (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id uAQDH79q043932; Sun, 27 Nov 2016 00:17:08 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 00:17:07 +1100 (EST) From: Ian Smith To: Jakub Lach cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Adrian Chadd , imp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Bogus turbo mode with Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU P9700 (2.80GHz) In-Reply-To: <1480133771286-6147461.post@n6.nabble.com> Message-ID: <20161126233444.R2342@sola.nimnet.asn.au> References: <1480133771286-6147461.post@n6.nabble.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2016 13:17:21 -0000 On Fri, 25 Nov 2016 21:16:11 -0700, Jakub Lach wrote: > Hello, Hi. Replying to this 'cos your later response to Adrian got .. nobbled. > Since I'm running this CPU, I've noticed there is additional > field in supported frequency (under heavy load)- > > dev.cpu.0.cx_supported: C1/1/1 C2/2/1 C3/3/57 > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2801/35000 2800/35000 2450/30625 2133/23888 > 1866/20902 1600/15000 1400/13125 1200/11250 1000/9375 800/12000 700/10500 > 600/9000 500/7500 400/6000 300/4500 200/3000 100/1500 > dev.cpu.0.freq: 2801 > dev.cpu.0.temperature: 67,0C > > as far as I know, the +1 MHz mode is a turbo boost factory > overclock, however this CPU does not support it. Anybody knows > what's going on? > > I've previously had T9400 (2.53 GHz), there was no such thing listed > and it was running slightly cooler under load, despite having higher > TDP (however P9700 is a lot cooler when idle, as expected). > > Still, I don't think it is possible it's actually being overclocked? My X200 has an Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU P8600 @ 2.40GHz, less than a year older than yours, still Penryn. Last time I explored this on the Intel site it didn't do Turbo Boost as such but it did do some earlier version of that; sorry I forget its name or details, and ark.intel.com seems different from what I found then. No time to hunt now. In a message to freebsd-mobile@ on 4 Feb 2015, in response to mine Warner Losh advised: > > On my X200 it's '2401/35000 2400/35000 1600/15000 800/12000' and I > > found hiadaptive rather aggressive, where adaptive works fine for > > my use - but of course everybody's use is different :) > > > > powerd_flags="-a adp -b adp -i 70 -r 90" > > The X+1 number (in this case 2401) is the turbo-mode speed. If you > use X, it disables the Turbo mode which causes the CPU to run faster > until it gets too hot. On my T400, I found that if I limit powerd to > X instead of X+1, I have fewer heat related issues when Im doing > things like building a kernel > > Warner So I've run powerd with flag '-M 2400' since without issue either way. But then, I'm doing many timing runs where consistent CPU speed at load is a virtue, and I recall it definitly ran somewhat cooler at full load. Not that 67C is particularly hot; running say sysutils/stress with '-c 4 -t 20m' gets my X200 to >80C in warmer weather, but the fan holds it ok. cheers, Ian