Bug 847844 - cpufreq does not scale frequency up from lowest frequency
Summary: cpufreq does not scale frequency up from lowest frequency
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: kernel
Version: 16
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Kernel Maintainer List
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2012-08-13 18:11 UTC by Klaus Lichtenwalder
Modified: 2013-02-13 15:40 UTC (History)
7 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-02-13 15:40:30 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
output of respective dmesg and cpupower frequency-info (160.00 KB, text/plain)
2012-09-05 18:56 UTC, Klaus Lichtenwalder
no flags Details

Description Klaus Lichtenwalder 2012-08-13 18:11:08 UTC
Description of problem:
since probably at least kernel-3.3.1-5.fc16.x86_64 the cpufreq subsystem can't scale the cpufrequency on any other frequency than the lowest.
cpupower reports:

  current policy: frequency should be within 1.60 GHz and 1.60 GHz.
                  The governor "ondemand" may decide which speed to use
                  within this range.



Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Kernels greater than 3.3.1-5 (at least)

How reproducible:
Boot any kernel, check cpupower frequency-info


Steps to Reproduce:
1. see above
2.
3.
  
Actual results:
See above

Expected results:
System will be able to scale frequencies

Additional info:
Am now running 3.1.0-7.fc16.x86_64 from Fed16 install media, as this is the only kernel I could still lay my hands on that still scales frequency

Smolt ID 5b8b26fb-f7c1-4a20-a773-24946944ac4c

Comment 1 Justin M. Forbes 2012-08-17 16:51:16 UTC
What CPU do you have?  I am seeing:


current policy: frequency should be within 800 MHz and 2.80 GHz.
                  The governor "ondemand" may decide which speed to use
                  within this range.

So this is limited to certain systems or CPUs I would guess.

Comment 2 Klaus Lichtenwalder 2012-08-17 17:48:28 UTC
I have a
model name	: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU     E7500  @ 2.93GHz

This scales at
  available frequency steps: 2.93 GHz, 2.13 GHz, 1.60 GHz
with 3.1.0-7.fc16.x86_64, but not with any kernel since May

Comment 3 Justin M. Forbes 2012-08-24 20:45:15 UTC
This sounds very much like a bad memory stick. possible to run memtest and rule that out?

Comment 4 Klaus Lichtenwalder 2012-08-25 07:49:15 UTC
A bad memory? How would that possible that a bad memory dimm prevents the cpu to frequency scale on kernels >(=) 3.3.0, but scales well on 3.1? BTW, there are two machines showing the same behaviour. 
As I'm only able to activate acpi-cpufreq, I'd more lean to changes in acpi. But if you think it's the memory, I'll will run memtest, no prolem

Comment 5 Klaus Lichtenwalder 2012-08-25 18:58:56 UTC
Just to be no spoiler, I ran memtest. No problems, as expected

Comment 6 Josh Boyer 2012-09-05 13:58:05 UTC
Could you please attach the output of dmesg from both the 3.1.0-7 and most recent 3.4 F16 kernel while also adding cpufreq.debug=7 to the command line?

Comment 7 Klaus Lichtenwalder 2012-09-05 18:55:27 UTC
Hi,

attached you will find dmesg output and also cpupower frequency-info (the first one is in german, sorry)

Klaus

Comment 8 Klaus Lichtenwalder 2012-09-05 18:56:36 UTC
Created attachment 610110 [details]
output of respective dmesg and cpupower frequency-info

Comment 9 Dave Jones 2012-10-23 15:31:43 UTC
# Mass update to all open bugs.

Kernel 3.6.2-1.fc16 has just been pushed to updates.
This update is a significant rebase from the previous version.

Please retest with this kernel, and let us know if your problem has been fixed.

In the event that you have upgraded to a newer release and the bug you reported
is still present, please change the version field to the newest release you have
encountered the issue with.  Before doing so, please ensure you are testing the
latest kernel update in that release and attach any new and relevant information
you may have gathered.

If you are not the original bug reporter and you still experience this bug,
please file a new report, as it is possible that you may be seeing a
different problem. 
(Please don't clone this bug, a fresh bug referencing this bug in the comment is sufficient).

Comment 10 Klaus Lichtenwalder 2012-10-23 17:54:58 UTC
Well, actually, no cigar. I'm sorry, but maybe the acpi of this motherboard just is too strange:
With 3.6.2-1:
analyzing CPU 0:
  driver: acpi-cpufreq
  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: 1.60 GHz - 2.93 GHz
  available frequency steps: 2.93 GHz, 2.13 GHz, 1.60 GHz
  available cpufreq governors: conservative, userspace, powersave, ondemand, performance
  current policy: frequency should be within 1.60 GHz and 1.60 GHz.
                  The governor "performance" may decide which speed to use
                  within this range.
  current CPU frequency is 1.60 GHz (asserted by call to hardware).
  boost state support:
    Supported: no
    Active: no

Notice, it does recognize the higher frequencies, but neither performance, userspace nor ondemand has any different output than that shown in current policy.

I'm back on 3.1.0-7.fc16, which has:
analyzing CPU 0:
  driver: acpi-cpufreq
  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: 1.60 GHz - 2.93 GHz
  available frequency steps: 2.93 GHz, 2.13 GHz, 1.60 GHz
  available cpufreq governors: conservative, userspace, powersave, ondemand, performance
  current policy: frequency should be within 1.60 GHz and 2.93 GHz.
                  The governor "ondemand" may decide which speed to use
                  within this range.
  current CPU frequency is 1.60 GHz (asserted by call to hardware).
  boost state support:
    Supported: no
    Active: no

Comment 11 Fedora End Of Life 2013-01-16 14:33:34 UTC
This message is a reminder that Fedora 16 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 16. 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 '16'.

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 16'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 16 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, you are encouraged to click on 
"Clone This Bug" and open it against that version of Fedora.

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: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping

Comment 12 Fedora End Of Life 2013-02-13 15:40:34 UTC
Fedora 16 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2013-02-12. Fedora 16 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.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.