Cpufreq scalling

Aleph · posted: 2013-08-09 12:00

Hi friends!

I am new in AntiX and I am very impressed about how my old HP Compaq nx6310 is performing now!

Really AntiX is a very good OS.

Congrats for your nice work friends!!!

Sorry, after the install I have a question:

The cpufreq is always showing the highest speed, like performance: 1,7 Mhz

Cpufreq Is set up out of the box ondemand?

Can you help me to change it to ondemand or something similar?

Thanks from Seville, Spain.

dolphin_oracle · posted: 2013-08-09 13:08

the default is to use ondemand. are you using the full edition of antix?

the command is as root :

Code: Select all

#cpufreq-set -c 0 -g ondemand -r

if its not installed, you will need cpufrequtils for this to work.

Aleph · posted: 2013-08-09 15:43

dolphin_oracle wrote:the default is to use ondemand. are you using the full edition of antix?

the command is as root :
Code: Select all
#cpufreq-set -c 0 -g ondemand -r
if its not installed, you will need cpufrequtils for this to work.

Hi dolphin_oracle!

Is the full edition. Cpufrequtils is installed.

When I type the command nothing happens...

dolphin_oracle · posted: 2013-08-09 16:06

is there any output at all? If so , please post it.

Aleph · posted: 2013-08-09 16:34

dolphin_oracle wrote:is there any output at all? If so , please post it.

No output

Code: Select all

luis@antiX1:~
$ sudo cpufreq-set -c 0 -g ondemand -r
[sudo] password for luis: 
luis@antiX1:~
$

dolphin_oracle · posted: 2013-08-09 17:10

please post the output of the following

Code: Select all

$cpufreq-info

and

Code: Select all

$inxi

thanks.

d.o.

Aleph · posted: 2013-08-10 07:51

Here are:

Code: Select all

luis@antiX1:~
$ sudo cpufreq-info
[sudo] password for luis: 
cpufrequtils 008: cpufreq-info (C) Dominik Brodowski 2004-2009
Report errors and bugs to cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, please.
analyzing CPU 0:
  no or unknown cpufreq driver is active on this CPU
  maximum transition latency: 0.00 ms.
luis@antiX1:~

Code: Select all

$ sudo inxi 
CPU~Single core Intel Celeron M CPU 430 (-UP-) clocked at 1728.984 Mhz Kernel~3.7.10-antix.3-486-smp i686 Up~4 min Mem~256.7/1000.1MB HDD~60.0GB(5.7% used) Procs~105 Client~Shell inxi~1.9.9

BitJam · posted: 2013-08-10 08:06

Aleph wrote:Intel Celeron M CPU 430

This
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Ubuntu/2008-01/msg01482.html"
linktext was:"thread"
====================================
was started by someone else having this same problem with the same CPU. One suggestion was to try to enable frequency scaling in the BIOS.

Unfortunately,
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Celeron-M-410-vs-Intel-Celeron-430"
linktext was:"this page"
====================================
says the 430 does not have scaling.

Aleph · 10 Aug 2013, 08:13 #9 2013-08-10 08:13

BitJam wrote:
Aleph wrote:Intel Celeron M CPU 430
This
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Ubuntu/2008-01/msg01482.html"
linktext was:"thread"
====================================
was started by someone else having this same problem with the same CPU. One suggestion was to try to enable frequency scaling in the BIOS.

Unfortunately,
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Celeron-M-410-vs-Intel-Celeron-430"
linktext was:"this page"
====================================
says the 430 does not have scaling.

Then there are not solution __{{emoticon}}__

Thanks for your help.

SamK · posted: 2013-08-10 11:06

I've been down this road with Celeron CPUs. It was in antiX-12-Full with a liquorix kernel (3.4.0-3.dmz.1-liquorix-686).

The arch wiki shows a table of driver modules.

========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/CPU_Frequency_Scaling"
linktext was:"https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/CP ... cy_Scaling"
====================================

It indicates that the driver for Celerons is p4-clockmod. It goes on to suggest using the Speedstep driver instead.

Both drivers can be loaded via

Code: Select all

sudo modprobe --verbose DRIVERNAME

However, in all cases tested here, CPUfreq only works with p4-clockmod as verified via the command

Code: Select all

cpufreq-info

This output also contains a list of the avilable governors.

Once the driver is loaded, the governors can be changed using the previously supplied command

Code: Select all

sudo cpufreq-set -c 0 -g GOVERNORNAME -r

The conservative and ondemand and governors appear not to work. The performance, powersave and userspace governors seem OK.

In antiX-13-Full as shipped, a list of drivers can be obtained via

Code: Select all

ls -1 /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/kernel/drivers/cpufreq/
acpi-cpufreq.ko
cpufreq_conservative.ko
cpufreq-nforce2.ko
cpufreq_powersave.ko
cpufreq_stats.ko
e_powersaver.ko
gx-suspmod.ko
longhaul.ko
longrun.ko
mperf.ko
pcc-cpufreq.ko
powernow-k6.ko
powernow-k7.ko
powernow-k8.ko
speedstep-centrino.ko
speedstep-ich.ko
speedstep-lib.ko
speedstep-smi.ko

The p4-clockmod driver is not provided, so of course cannot be used. The Speedstep drivers can be loaded but (as above) do not seem to work on the Celeron CPUs tested here.

As antiX is aimed at both modern and older systems, and as there are still plenty of old Celeron systems around, might it be worth providing the p4-clockmod driver within the stock antiX?

dolphin_oracle · posted: 2013-08-10 12:16

the p4-clockmod worked by forcing the cpu to skip work on cycles. It used to present an interface to cpufreq-info that lied. It would tell you that you were running at 320 mhz for example when you were actually running at 3.2 ghz but only doing work every 10th cycle. The purpose was thermal management, which on the p4 class machines, can be important. it didn't save any power though, and the ondemand governor is purposely disabled for it.

if the speedstep driver (speedstep-lib.ko for this processor, i think) also allows for the thermal management, then it might be worth trying. The frequency of the cpu is locked though so only the maximum clock state will be shown.

I wouldn't worry about it unless you have an overheating problem.

anticapitalista · posted: 2013-08-10 12:23

According to Gusar at Gentoo forums in this post

========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-956614-start-0.html"
linktext was:"https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-9 ... art-0.html"
====================================

p4-clockmod has nothing to do with cpufreq.

SamK · posted: 2013-08-10 13:25

dolphin_oracle wrote:if the speedstep driver (speedstep-lib.ko for this processor, i think) also allows for the thermal management, then it might be worth trying.

Already tried (as mentioned earlier). The driver can be loaded OK via modprobe but is not recognised (no output) via cpufreq-info.

anticapitalista wrote:According to Gusar at Gentoo forums in this post

Interestingly, fan noise was one of the reasons I originally looked into CPUfreq on an ancient Celeron laptop running antiX-12.

SamK · posted: 2013-08-10 14:25

anticapitalista wrote:According to Gusar at Gentoo forums in this post

========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-956614-start-0.html"
linktext was:"https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-9 ... art-0.html"
====================================

p4-clockmod has nothing to do with cpufreq.

From antiX-12 running 3.5.0-antix.2-486-smp, the p4-clockmod.ko is in the same directory as all the CPUfreq drivers

Code: Select all

ls -1 /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/kernel/drivers/cpufreq
acpi-cpufreq.ko
cpufreq-nforce2.ko
cpufreq_powersave.ko
cpufreq_stats.ko
cpufreq_userspace.ko
e_powersaver.ko
gx-suspmod.ko
longhaul.ko
longrun.ko
mperf.ko
p4-clockmod.ko
pcc-cpufreq.ko
powernow-k6.ko
powernow-k7.ko
powernow-k8.ko
speedstep-centrino.ko
speedstep-ich.ko
speedstep-lib.ko
speedstep-smi.ko

SamK · posted: 2013-08-11 07:48

dolphin_oracle wrote:I wouldn't worry about it unless you have an overheating problem.

On reviewing the outcome of the original investigation, that is the conclusion reached about that particular laptop. The system doesn't use cpufreq. It runs in loud and very loud modes as mentioned in the above link. These were deemed more desirable than the (ahem) benefits (ahem) of using cpufreq with p4-clockmod. For a different user a different outcome may have been wanted.