Description of problem:
When cpufreq / cpuspeed is enable and running with governor "ondemand", it stays at the highest frequency without ever switching to lower, even on a completely idle machine.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Linux version 22.214.171.124-57.fc13.i686.PAE
Steps to Reproduce:
1. cpufreq-set -gondemand
2. make sure nothing is running on the machine.
cpu is running at the highest possible frequency
cpu should be running at the lowest frequency
I run Fedora 10 on the exact same hardware, and cpufreq works as expected, at the lowest frequency most of the time, and switching to a higher frequency when the machine becomes busy.
Yves, could you attach the /proc/cpuinfo info and dmidecode's output to this bugzilla.
processor : 0
vendor_id : CentaurHauls
cpu family : 6
model : 10
model name : VIA Esther processor 1200MHz
stepping : 9
cpu MHz : 1200.000
cache size : 128 KB
fdiv_bug : no
hlt_bug : no
f00f_bug : no
coma_bug : no
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : yes
cpuid level : 1
wp : yes
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge cmov pat
clflush acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 tm nx up pni est tm2 rng rng_en ace ace_en ace2 a
ce2_en phe phe_en pmm pmm_en
bogomips : 2400.11
clflush size : 64
cache_alignment : 64
address sizes : 36 bits physical, 32 bits virtual
Created attachment 409075 [details]
dmidecode output for Jetway J7F4K1G2E
uhmm... Via... cpufreq-info output will be helpful as well then.
thank you! :)
cpufrequtils 007: cpufreq-info (C) Dominik Brodowski 2004-2009
Report errors and bugs to email@example.com, please.
analyzing CPU 0:
CPUs which run at the same hardware frequency: 0
CPUs which need to have their frequency coordinated by software: 0
maximum transition latency: 10.0 us.
hardware limits: 400 MHz - 1.20 GHz
available frequency steps: 1.20 GHz, 400 MHz
available cpufreq governors: ondemand, userspace, performance
current policy: frequency should be within 400 MHz and 1.20 GHz.
The governor "ondemand" may decide which speed to use
within this range.
current CPU frequency is 1.20 GHz (asserted by call to hardware).
I re-built my machine with Fedora 12, and this same problem is happening there too. Note that I have another machine (exact same hardware) with Fedora 10, which does not have this problem.
Yves, I'm a bit stuck, don't have such cpu around. please could you provide the contents of dmesg dump from a fresh boot with cpufreq.debug=7 added as a kernel boot parameter.
Yves, please, the output I requested is important for solving your issue.
Sorry, been busy, but I will get the info requested sometimes this week.
Created attachment 413024 [details]
dmesg output with cpufreq.debug=7
Yves, could you confirm the frequency scaling works fine before suspend-resume cycle. I see the dmesg polluted right after resume. :/
escalated to https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15965
Sorry about that, I keep re-building this box, I originally wanted to run FC13 but run into a bug (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=583223) that prevent me from using it at all.
The machine is currently at FC12 and wasn't patched. I have done yum update on it last night.
The cpufreq issue is still there (was in FC13 last time I checked too), I will put a keyboard and monitor on it and re-start it with cpufreq.debug=7 again, and will post the output. The dmesg loop might go away.
Created attachment 413604 [details]
dmesg output with cpufreq.debug=7 on FC12 after a yum update
Yves, I'd like to ask you to get an account at bugzilla.kernel.org and provide few more info there.
So that I won't act as proxy and you help us directly in solving your issue. :) Thank you very much.
(In reply to comment #11)
> Yves, could you confirm the frequency scaling works fine before suspend-resume
> cycle. I see the dmesg polluted right after resume. :/
This is a low power main board which, as far as I know, does not support suspend/resume - I sure don't suspend it....
(In reply to comment #15)
> Yves, I'd like to ask you to get an account at bugzilla.kernel.org and
> provide few more info there.
> So that I won't act as proxy and you help us directly in solving your issue.
> :) Thank you very much.
I did so tonight.
(In reply to comment #16)
> I did so tonight.
thanks for your effort! Will be watching the progress...
This message is a reminder that Fedora 13 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 13. It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time
this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora
'version' of '13'.
Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version'
to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 13's end of life.
Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that
we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 13 is end of life. If you
would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it
against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this
bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version,
please add a comment here and someone will do it for you.
Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes
bugs or makes them obsolete.
The process we are following is described here:
Fedora 13 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2011-06-25. Fedora 13 is
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.
If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version.
Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.