From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Sep 15 19:32:32 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F639106564A
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 19:32:32 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from kmacybsd@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-vw0-f45.google.com (mail-vw0-f45.google.com
	[209.85.212.45])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6C768FC15
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 19:32:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by vws17 with SMTP id 17so5046451vws.18
	for <multiple recipients>; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 12:32:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
	:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
	bh=Kd21MM8j0IVLVgW+MYHEHpwUcKmDugldeBbc7Zhw9TI=;
	b=tE6UYwq0a85o4exNlm3c1nNgxo7mh1eLUXdOEWPL+bmwBUFJbMmoxENO8SUDi3oFzK
	cc26QCRCMwWs9vybUE2ytO03UwJ+0/Vzo9lVrZrECRBe5YO7JbMDJOlg76VeKSeFD70J
	MEDc/FAYHrnojvKSXPWi0FGX4UxGa1FCe1Zb8=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.96.166 with SMTP id dt6mr1320361vdb.345.1316115150944; Thu,
	15 Sep 2011 12:32:30 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: kmacybsd@gmail.com
Received: by 10.52.113.225 with HTTP; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 12:32:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4E72505B.30700@FreeBSD.org>
References: <CACqU3MWNgq4RkBu7-eUON20CWdfO38KbM-8hR0AnFV-mn_=-7A@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E72505B.30700@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 21:32:30 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: HJEB6KrlcHjZIu5-yUHe9f-bi9k
Message-ID: <CAHM0Q_PgPKi2R-wVkNi1HeNbU5KGf7H_LcUZPni6Je7=iWo8eQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: "K. Macy" <kmacy@freebsd.org>
To: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: FreeBSD-Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>,
	Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 9.0-BETA2 do not support SpeedStep on E5420
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 19:32:32 -0000

On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:22 PM, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> wrote:
> on 15/09/2011 19:20 Arnaud Lacombe said the following:
>> est0: failed to enable SpeedStep
>> p4tcc0: <CPU Frequency Thermal Control> on cpu0
>> est1: failed to enable SpeedStep
>> p4tcc1: <CPU Frequency Thermal Control> on cpu1
>> est2: failed to enable SpeedStep
>> p4tcc2: <CPU Frequency Thermal Control> on cpu2
>> est3: failed to enable SpeedStep
>> p4tcc3: <CPU Frequency Thermal Control> on cpu3
>> est4: failed to enable SpeedStep
>> p4tcc4: <CPU Frequency Thermal Control> on cpu4
>> est5: failed to enable SpeedStep
>> p4tcc5: <CPU Frequency Thermal Control> on cpu5
>> est6: failed to enable SpeedStep
>> p4tcc6: <CPU Frequency Thermal Control> on cpu6
>> est7: failed to enable SpeedStep
>> p4tcc7: <CPU Frequency Thermal Control> on cpu7
>>
>> It feels strange that the latest FreeBSD do not support est(4) on a 3
>> years old CPU...
>
> Somehow I do not read "failed to enable" as "can not detect" or "can not
> support" SpeedStep on this CPU.


sys/x86/cpufreq/est.c:1008

	/* Attempt to enable SpeedStep if not currently enabled. */
	msr = rdmsr(MSR_MISC_ENABLE);
	if ((msr & MSR_SS_ENABLE) == 0) {
		wrmsr(MSR_MISC_ENABLE, msr | MSR_SS_ENABLE);
		if (bootverbose)
			device_printf(dev, "enabling SpeedStep\n");

		/* Check if the enable failed. */
		msr = rdmsr(MSR_MISC_ENABLE);
		if ((msr & MSR_SS_ENABLE) == 0) {
			device_printf(dev, "failed to enable SpeedStep\n");
			return (ENXIO);
		}
	}


Andriy -

He is correct. Possibly power management on server processors isn't
considered a priority by the maintainer.