[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1579278] Re: Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance" (Ubuntu Server)

2016-06-08 Thread Martin Pitt
In yakkety I'll add an ondemand.service to systemd, as /etc/init.d/ondemand fell out of the standard installation (as "initscripts" is now -- thankfully -- gone). I'll keep the xenial task in case someone is interested in SRUing this. ** Changed in: sysvinit (Ubuntu) Status: New => Invalid

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1579278] Re: Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance" (Ubuntu Server)

2016-06-08 Thread Martin Pitt
So it seems we should make the "ondemand" init script a no-op if /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_driver contains "intel_pstate", since in this case "ondemand" is worse than "performance"? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1579278] Re: Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance" (Ubuntu Server)

2016-05-23 Thread Haw Loeung
Bug #1188647 enables Intel PSTATE by default. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is subscribed to linux in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1579278 Title: Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1579278] Re: Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance" (Ubuntu Server)

2016-05-23 Thread Haw Loeung
In that same Google+ post, Arjan van de Ven wrote: """ Now, about ondemand and cpufreq. The ondemand algorithm was designed roughly 10 years ago, for CPUs from that era. If you look at what ondemand really ends up doing, is managing the frequency during idle periods, and 10 years ago, that

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1579278] Re: Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance" (Ubuntu Server)

2016-05-13 Thread Greg Mason
It looks like /etc/init.d/ondemand doesn't have any support for the performance governor at all. On systems that only have "performance" and "powersave" the only thing /etc/init.d/ondemand will do is set the governor to powersave. I'll file the appropriate bug against the initscripts package. --

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1579278] Re: Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance" (Ubuntu Server)

2016-05-09 Thread Haw Loeung
Ah thanks. So maybe /etc/init.d/ondemand should have something to override or disable it (say DISABLE=1 in /etc/default/ondemand)? Looking at it currently, it seems to prefer governors in this order - interactive, ondemand, powersave. Even an option in /etc/default/ondemand to specify the

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1579278] Re: Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance" (Ubuntu Server)

2016-05-09 Thread Tim Gardner
The default is already CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE=y. However, it can be changed from user space. I suggest looking at /etc/init.d/ondemand ** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu Xenial) Status: Triaged => Invalid -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1579278] Re: Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance" (Ubuntu Server)

2016-05-09 Thread Tim Gardner
The default is already CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE=y. However, it can be changed from user space. I suggest looking at /etc/init.d/ondemand ** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu) Status: Triaged => Invalid -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1579278] Re: Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance" (Ubuntu Server)

2016-05-09 Thread Joseph Salisbury
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => Wishlist ** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu Xenial) Importance: Undecided => Wishlist ** Tags added: kernel-da-key xenial ** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Triaged ** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu Xenial) Status:

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1579278] Re: Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance" (Ubuntu Server)

2016-05-06 Thread Haw Loeung
** Summary changed: - Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance" + Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance" (Ubuntu Server) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1579278] Re: Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance"

2016-05-06 Thread Haw Loeung
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete => Confirmed ** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu Xenial) Status: Incomplete => Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is subscribed to linux in Ubuntu.

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1579278] Re: Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance"

2016-05-06 Thread Greg Mason
Looking at the kernel CPUFreq Governors documentation[1], It looks like powersave is actually a pretty poor default value for many applications, but especially servers. I'm not sure about low-power applications like laptops, and how power usage is affected by frequency on other architectures.

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1579278] Re: Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance"

2016-05-06 Thread Haw Loeung
| - 26.02% 0.08% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] cpu_startup_entry |- 25.94% cpu_startup_entry | - 23.65% call_cpuidle | - 23.63% cpuidle_enter | - 17.31% cpuidle_enter_state | 17.04% intel_idle | 0.04%

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1579278] Re: Consider changing default CPU frequency scaling governor back to "performance"

2016-05-06 Thread Haw Loeung
As Theodore Ts'o has pointed out[1]: """ ... with modern Intel processors, the ondemand CPU governor is actually counterproductive because waking up to decide whether the CPU is idle keeps it from entering the deepest sleep states, and so (somewhat counterintuitively) the performance governor