[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-07-16 Thread Lars Hochstetter

Hi Angel,

here are the read outs (-X -0) for the MSRs:

0x00CE -> 00080C10F0011C00

0x0194 -> 0009

0x01AD -> 24242526


I'd say the issue is because of how I determine the overclocking
headroom that the CPU is capable of. On my CPUs, it happens that the
number of OC bins is the same as the number of steps between the base
frequency ratio and the maximum turbo ratio. I imagine this isn't the
case for other CPUs (which I do not currently have any of nearby) and
would explain why the gains aren't as high as expected.


From what I've heard about Ivy Bridge Mobile CPUs it depends on the TDP 
(I don't know about the Sandy Bridge or ULV models):


CPUs with 35W TDP should just work as you described.

CPUs with 45W TDP can be "overclocked" by up to 400MHz on top of their 
maximum turbo ratio. In the case of my i7-3840QM it should reach around 
4,2 GHz (without taking additional voltage into consideration).


CPUs with 55W TDP (i.e. the extreme edition "XM") have a unlocked 
multiplier and may be considered as the equivalent to the "K" CPUs on 
the desktop.



In its current state, my patch seems to achieve that :P


It certainly does ;) I find it curious though that intel_pstate and 
acpi-cpufreq exhibit different behaviors in terms of maximum frequency.


Kind regards,

Lars
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-07-15 Thread Angel Pons
Hi Lars, list,

On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 5:41 PM Lars Hochstetter
 wrote:
>
> Update: I tried the https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/42547/ on
> my T430 (i7-3840QM, Debian Buster 4.19.0-9-amd64) using coreboot v4.12 +
> SeaBIOS as base.
>
> I used s-tui to track the CPU frequency.
>
> Without the patch on coreboot v4.12 the CPU reached its "usual" 3.3 -
> 3.4 GHz (4C/8T) using the stress function of s-tui.
>
> With the patch the CPU reached at most 3.2GHz (intel_pstate) / 2.8GHz
> (acpi-cpufreq).

Thanks for testing! I'm the one who made that change, and I currently
only have two CPUs to test it with. I generally check the CPU
frequency with: `cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep MHz`

> Maybe there is an issue with mobile CPUs?

I'd say the issue is because of how I determine the overclocking
headroom that the CPU is capable of. On my CPUs, it happens that the
number of OC bins is the same as the number of steps between the base
frequency ratio and the maximum turbo ratio. I imagine this isn't the
case for other CPUs (which I do not currently have any of nearby) and
would explain why the gains aren't as high as expected.

It would be nice if you could provide a few MSR values from that CPU.
You can use `rdmsr` from msr-tools: https://github.com/intel/msr-tools

 * 0xce  (MSR_PLATFORM_INFO)
 * 0x194 (MSR_FLEX_RATIO)
 * 0x1ad (MSR_TURBO_RATIO_LIMIT)

> On 24.06.20 20:00, Lars Hochstetter wrote:
> > Hi, thanks for the pointer!
> >
> > I only fear that running my CPU at the maximum possible Turbo Ratio
> > will overheat it.
> >
> > I can give it a try but I'm actually looking for an option to limit
> > the maximum Turbo Ratio the CPU is allowed to reach (hence the
> > disabling of TurboBoost altogether).

In its current state, my patch seems to achieve that :P

> > On 21/06/2020 00:52, Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot wrote:
> >> Hi again. There's another patch that fits to the topic that you will
> >> probably want to try out:
> >> https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/42547/
> >>
> >> On 12/15/19 3:57 PM, Lars Hochstetter wrote:
> >>> Hi everyone,
> >>>
> >>> I'm looking for an option to configure my Intel IvyBridge CPU
> >>> (enable / disable Hyperthreading, TurboBoost, set configurable TDP
> >>> level etc.) using coreboot / nvramcui. My board is a Lenovo Thinkpad
> >>> T430. So far, "only virtualization" is configurable and can not be
> >>> enabled / disabled "in flight" but requires a rebuild of coreboot.
> >>>
> >>> Is anyone currently working on something similar?
> >>>
> >>> Is anything planned in that regard?
> >>>
> >>> Kind regards
> >>>
> >>> lhochstetter

Thanks in advance,

Angel
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-07-15 Thread Lars Hochstetter
Update: I tried the https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/42547/ on 
my T430 (i7-3840QM, Debian Buster 4.19.0-9-amd64) using coreboot v4.12 + 
SeaBIOS as base.


I used s-tui to track the CPU frequency.

Without the patch on coreboot v4.12 the CPU reached its "usual" 3.3 - 
3.4 GHz (4C/8T) using the stress function of s-tui.


With the patch the CPU reached at most 3.2GHz (intel_pstate) / 2.8GHz 
(acpi-cpufreq).


Maybe there is an issue with mobile CPUs?

On 24.06.20 20:00, Lars Hochstetter wrote:

Hi, thanks for the pointer!

I only fear that running my CPU at the maximum possible Turbo Ratio 
will overheat it.


I can give it a try but I'm actually looking for an option to limit 
the maximum Turbo Ratio the CPU is allowed to reach (hence the 
disabling of TurboBoost altogether).


On 21/06/2020 00:52, Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot wrote:
Hi again. There's another patch that fits to the topic that you will 
probably want to try out: 
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/42547/


On 12/15/19 3:57 PM, Lars Hochstetter wrote:

Hi everyone,

I'm looking for an option to configure my Intel IvyBridge CPU 
(enable / disable Hyperthreading, TurboBoost, set configurable TDP 
level etc.) using coreboot / nvramcui. My board is a Lenovo Thinkpad 
T430. So far, "only virtualization" is configurable and can not be 
enabled / disabled "in flight" but requires a rebuild of coreboot.


Is anyone currently working on something similar?

Is anything planned in that regard?

Kind regards

lhochstetter
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-07-10 Thread Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot
So, it's been three weeks, no hangs, no crashes, everything's fine on my 
W530 (which is my primary working machine) with 5.4.28-gentoo kernel and 
HT disabled by coreboot patch. CPU is i7-3940XM.


On 20.06.2020 14:46, Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot wrote:

Could be... Thanks for testing!

I've also put it on some of my daily work machines: a quad-code Ivy 
and a dual-code Sandy in order to see how it works in a real world... 
Works so far. So if it doesn't end up crashing in a week or two I'd 
say it's stable. We'll see.


On 6/20/20 1:42 PM, Lars Hochstetter wrote:

Update II:

All tests passed with and without HT enabled!

I discovered something curious though - if I disable HT memtest86+ 
finishes a pass in 45ish minutes. If I enable HT it takes 4+ hours.


I don't know if it's due to coreboot or memtest86+ as memtest86+ 
v5.01 also took around 4+ hours for all tests with HT enabled.


Maybe it is a bug with memtest86+ ?

On 19.06.20 00:58, Lars Hochstetter wrote:

Update: I managed to get memtest86+ v5.31b running.

I downloaded the .iso.zip and used geteltorito v0.6 to turn the .iso 
file into a 1.44meg floppy image. I then added the floppy image like 
the memtest86+ v5.01 floppy image to my coreboot image (4.12 + 
patchset 15).


Preliminary tests with memtest86+ v5.31b went without an issue 
(Note: I didn't run all the tests, but test #7 was passed with and 
without HT).


I'll try to run all tests with and without HT on 4.12 + patchset 15 
around the weekend.

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-06-24 Thread Lars Hochstetter

Hi, thanks for the pointer!

I only fear that running my CPU at the maximum possible Turbo Ratio will 
overheat it.


I can give it a try but I'm actually looking for an option to limit the 
maximum Turbo Ratio the CPU is allowed to reach (hence the disabling of 
TurboBoost altogether).


On 21/06/2020 00:52, Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot wrote:
Hi again. There's another patch that fits to the topic that you will 
probably want to try out: https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/42547/


On 12/15/19 3:57 PM, Lars Hochstetter wrote:

Hi everyone,

I'm looking for an option to configure my Intel IvyBridge CPU (enable 
/ disable Hyperthreading, TurboBoost, set configurable TDP level 
etc.) using coreboot / nvramcui. My board is a Lenovo Thinkpad T430. 
So far, "only virtualization" is configurable and can not be enabled 
/ disabled "in flight" but requires a rebuild of coreboot.


Is anyone currently working on something similar?

Is anything planned in that regard?

Kind regards

lhochstetter
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-06-20 Thread Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot
Hi again. There's another patch that fits to the topic that you will 
probably want to try out: https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/42547/


On 12/15/19 3:57 PM, Lars Hochstetter wrote:

Hi everyone,

I'm looking for an option to configure my Intel IvyBridge CPU (enable 
/ disable Hyperthreading, TurboBoost, set configurable TDP level etc.) 
using coreboot / nvramcui. My board is a Lenovo Thinkpad T430. So far, 
"only virtualization" is configurable and can not be enabled / 
disabled "in flight" but requires a rebuild of coreboot.


Is anyone currently working on something similar?

Is anything planned in that regard?

Kind regards

lhochstetter
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-06-20 Thread Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot

s/code/core/, lol.

On 6/20/20 2:46 PM, Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot wrote:

Could be... Thanks for testing!

I've also put it on some of my daily work machines: a quad-code Ivy 
and a dual-code Sandy in order to see how it works in a real world... 
Works so far. So if it doesn't end up crashing in a week or two I'd 
say it's stable. We'll see.


On 6/20/20 1:42 PM, Lars Hochstetter wrote:

Update II:

All tests passed with and without HT enabled!

I discovered something curious though - if I disable HT memtest86+ 
finishes a pass in 45ish minutes. If I enable HT it takes 4+ hours.


I don't know if it's due to coreboot or memtest86+ as memtest86+ 
v5.01 also took around 4+ hours for all tests with HT enabled.


Maybe it is a bug with memtest86+ ?

On 19.06.20 00:58, Lars Hochstetter wrote:

Update: I managed to get memtest86+ v5.31b running.

I downloaded the .iso.zip and used geteltorito v0.6 to turn the .iso 
file into a 1.44meg floppy image. I then added the floppy image like 
the memtest86+ v5.01 floppy image to my coreboot image (4.12 + 
patchset 15).


Preliminary tests with memtest86+ v5.31b went without an issue 
(Note: I didn't run all the tests, but test #7 was passed with and 
without HT).


I'll try to run all tests with and without HT on 4.12 + patchset 15 
around the weekend.

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-06-20 Thread Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot

Could be... Thanks for testing!

I've also put it on some of my daily work machines: a quad-code Ivy and 
a dual-code Sandy in order to see how it works in a real world... Works 
so far. So if it doesn't end up crashing in a week or two I'd say it's 
stable. We'll see.


On 6/20/20 1:42 PM, Lars Hochstetter wrote:

Update II:

All tests passed with and without HT enabled!

I discovered something curious though - if I disable HT memtest86+ 
finishes a pass in 45ish minutes. If I enable HT it takes 4+ hours.


I don't know if it's due to coreboot or memtest86+ as memtest86+ v5.01 
also took around 4+ hours for all tests with HT enabled.


Maybe it is a bug with memtest86+ ?

On 19.06.20 00:58, Lars Hochstetter wrote:

Update: I managed to get memtest86+ v5.31b running.

I downloaded the .iso.zip and used geteltorito v0.6 to turn the .iso 
file into a 1.44meg floppy image. I then added the floppy image like 
the memtest86+ v5.01 floppy image to my coreboot image (4.12 + 
patchset 15).


Preliminary tests with memtest86+ v5.31b went without an issue (Note: 
I didn't run all the tests, but test #7 was passed with and without HT).


I'll try to run all tests with and without HT on 4.12 + patchset 15 
around the weekend.

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-06-20 Thread Lars Hochstetter

Update II:

All tests passed with and without HT enabled!

I discovered something curious though - if I disable HT memtest86+ 
finishes a pass in 45ish minutes. If I enable HT it takes 4+ hours.


I don't know if it's due to coreboot or memtest86+ as memtest86+ v5.01 
also took around 4+ hours for all tests with HT enabled.


Maybe it is a bug with memtest86+ ?

On 19.06.20 00:58, Lars Hochstetter wrote:

Update: I managed to get memtest86+ v5.31b running.

I downloaded the .iso.zip and used geteltorito v0.6 to turn the .iso 
file into a 1.44meg floppy image. I then added the floppy image like 
the memtest86+ v5.01 floppy image to my coreboot image (4.12 + 
patchset 15).


Preliminary tests with memtest86+ v5.31b went without an issue (Note: 
I didn't run all the tests, but test #7 was passed with and without HT).


I'll try to run all tests with and without HT on 4.12 + patchset 15 
around the weekend.

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-06-18 Thread Lars Hochstetter

Update: I managed to get memtest86+ v5.31b running.

I downloaded the .iso.zip and used geteltorito v0.6 to turn the .iso 
file into a 1.44meg floppy image. I then added the floppy image like the 
memtest86+ v5.01 floppy image to my coreboot image (4.12 + patchset 15).


Preliminary tests with memtest86+ v5.31b went without an issue (Note: I 
didn't run all the tests, but test #7 was passed with and without HT).


I'll try to run all tests with and without HT on 4.12 + patchset 15 
around the weekend.



On 18/06/2020 20:38, Lars Hochstetter wrote:

I tried the following:

4.11 + patchset 15
4.12 + patchset 15

In both cases I saw the same behaviour described in my last mail. 
(without HT -> freeze at test #7, with HT running fine for hours and 
finishing all tests)


The first run without HT on 4.12 + patchset 15 yielded 400+ errors but 
continued running to some point, the other two runs did get stuck on 
the "test #7 mark".


I also tried to get memtest86+ v5.31b to run from a USB stick but it 
doesn't work - I didn't dig deeper into it, yet.


I'm wondering if I could convert the memtest86+ v5.31b iso into a 
floppy image and add it just as I did with v5.01.



___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-06-18 Thread Lars Hochstetter

I tried the following:

4.11 + patchset 15
4.12 + patchset 15

In both cases I saw the same behaviour described in my last mail. 
(without HT -> freeze at test #7, with HT running fine for hours and 
finishing all tests)


The first run without HT on 4.12 + patchset 15 yielded 400+ errors but 
continued running to some point, the other two runs did get stuck on the 
"test #7 mark".


I also tried to get memtest86+ v5.31b to run from a USB stick but it 
doesn't work - I didn't dig deeper into it, yet.


I'm wondering if I could convert the memtest86+ v5.31b iso into a floppy 
image and add it just as I did with v5.01.


On 18.06.20 01:05, Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot wrote:

Hi!

Thank you for the report.

If you're still on it, can you try the latest update? There was 
seemingly incorrect reset sequence after setting the HT disable bit. 
I'm not sure if it was the reason of problems, but would be good to 
test again.


On 6/16/20 12:31 PM, Lars Hochstetter wrote:
Sorry for the long silence - I finally found some time to test the HT 
patch.


I used coreboot v4.11 as a basis since at this point in time the 
patch produced merge conflicts with newer commits.


I used memtest86+ v5.01 (forced SMP, RAM: 16GB @ 1600MHz, CPU: Intel 
i7-3840QM) as mentioned in my last mail. When HT is enabled 
memtest86+ runs just fine.


When I disable HT it gets reproducibly stuck at test #7 (block move), 
at 4096M-6144M, with cores 0-2 working, core 3 just switched to "W".


I'll test some other workloads which were problematic in the past 
(compiling coreboot, watching videos using Firefox).


Shall I provide my .config or any other information?

Regards

lhochstetter

On 11/02/2020 15:23, Lars Hochstetter wrote:
I managed to find some time to run memtest86+ v5.01 as a SeaBIOS 
payload [1].


As it turns out the RAM went bad - I made sure to check with another 
pair of sticks. I'll replace the RAM and retry the HT patch when my 
free time allows for it.


Sorry for creating so much noise over something so simple.

Regards

lhochstetter


[1] 
https://mail.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/2018-November/087713.html


On 2/8/20 4:23 PM, Lars Hochstetter wrote:
Unfortunately I'll be rather busy until mid April this year - here 
is my plan for the time being:


I'll reinstall Linux Mint Cinnamon, integrate memtest86+ into 
coreboot and run it. I'll report back if it's just bad RAM or 
something else.


Since my T430 was modified a couple times I'd also suggest we try 
to find someone with a more stock T430 to see if your HT patch 
works. The X230 somewhere in this thread worked and I'd argue that 
it does work properly on unmodified Thinkpads.


Sorry for a long reply too. About mrc.bin: no, it's actually 
possible to use mrc blob on Sandy/Ivy, but as I see it's not 
supported across all boards. X220 has support, other boards needs 
patching (or maybe patches are already on gerrit, I'm not sure). 
It shouldn't be hard to get it working, though. 
Can you elaborate on this one? Why does the X220 has support and 
other Sandy/IvyBridge based laptops are not supported? Wasn't one 
of the ideas for coreboot to have a more common code base or am I 
missing something obvious?


Regards

lhochstetter
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org



___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-06-17 Thread Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot

Hi!

Thank you for the report.

If you're still on it, can you try the latest update? There was 
seemingly incorrect reset sequence after setting the HT disable bit. I'm 
not sure if it was the reason of problems, but would be good to test again.


On 6/16/20 12:31 PM, Lars Hochstetter wrote:
Sorry for the long silence - I finally found some time to test the HT 
patch.


I used coreboot v4.11 as a basis since at this point in time the patch 
produced merge conflicts with newer commits.


I used memtest86+ v5.01 (forced SMP, RAM: 16GB @ 1600MHz, CPU: Intel 
i7-3840QM) as mentioned in my last mail. When HT is enabled memtest86+ 
runs just fine.


When I disable HT it gets reproducibly stuck at test #7 (block move), 
at 4096M-6144M, with cores 0-2 working, core 3 just switched to "W".


I'll test some other workloads which were problematic in the past 
(compiling coreboot, watching videos using Firefox).


Shall I provide my .config or any other information?

Regards

lhochstetter

On 11/02/2020 15:23, Lars Hochstetter wrote:
I managed to find some time to run memtest86+ v5.01 as a SeaBIOS 
payload [1].


As it turns out the RAM went bad - I made sure to check with another 
pair of sticks. I'll replace the RAM and retry the HT patch when my 
free time allows for it.


Sorry for creating so much noise over something so simple.

Regards

lhochstetter


[1] 
https://mail.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/2018-November/087713.html


On 2/8/20 4:23 PM, Lars Hochstetter wrote:
Unfortunately I'll be rather busy until mid April this year - here 
is my plan for the time being:


I'll reinstall Linux Mint Cinnamon, integrate memtest86+ into 
coreboot and run it. I'll report back if it's just bad RAM or 
something else.


Since my T430 was modified a couple times I'd also suggest we try to 
find someone with a more stock T430 to see if your HT patch works. 
The X230 somewhere in this thread worked and I'd argue that it does 
work properly on unmodified Thinkpads.


Sorry for a long reply too. About mrc.bin: no, it's actually 
possible to use mrc blob on Sandy/Ivy, but as I see it's not 
supported across all boards. X220 has support, other boards needs 
patching (or maybe patches are already on gerrit, I'm not sure). It 
shouldn't be hard to get it working, though. 
Can you elaborate on this one? Why does the X220 has support and 
other Sandy/IvyBridge based laptops are not supported? Wasn't one of 
the ideas for coreboot to have a more common code base or am I 
missing something obvious?


Regards

lhochstetter
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org



___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-06-16 Thread Lars Hochstetter
Sorry for the long silence - I finally found some time to test the HT 
patch.


I used coreboot v4.11 as a basis since at this point in time the patch 
produced merge conflicts with newer commits.


I used memtest86+ v5.01 (forced SMP, RAM: 16GB @ 1600MHz, CPU: Intel 
i7-3840QM) as mentioned in my last mail. When HT is enabled memtest86+ 
runs just fine.


When I disable HT it gets reproducibly stuck at test #7 (block move), at 
4096M-6144M, with cores 0-2 working, core 3 just switched to "W".


I'll test some other workloads which were problematic in the past 
(compiling coreboot, watching videos using Firefox).


Shall I provide my .config or any other information?

Regards

lhochstetter

On 11/02/2020 15:23, Lars Hochstetter wrote:
I managed to find some time to run memtest86+ v5.01 as a SeaBIOS 
payload [1].


As it turns out the RAM went bad - I made sure to check with another 
pair of sticks. I'll replace the RAM and retry the HT patch when my 
free time allows for it.


Sorry for creating so much noise over something so simple.

Regards

lhochstetter


[1] 
https://mail.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/2018-November/087713.html


On 2/8/20 4:23 PM, Lars Hochstetter wrote:
Unfortunately I'll be rather busy until mid April this year - here is 
my plan for the time being:


I'll reinstall Linux Mint Cinnamon, integrate memtest86+ into 
coreboot and run it. I'll report back if it's just bad RAM or 
something else.


Since my T430 was modified a couple times I'd also suggest we try to 
find someone with a more stock T430 to see if your HT patch works. 
The X230 somewhere in this thread worked and I'd argue that it does 
work properly on unmodified Thinkpads.


Sorry for a long reply too. About mrc.bin: no, it's actually 
possible to use mrc blob on Sandy/Ivy, but as I see it's not 
supported across all boards. X220 has support, other boards needs 
patching (or maybe patches are already on gerrit, I'm not sure). It 
shouldn't be hard to get it working, though. 
Can you elaborate on this one? Why does the X220 has support and 
other Sandy/IvyBridge based laptops are not supported? Wasn't one of 
the ideas for coreboot to have a more common code base or am I 
missing something obvious?


Regards

lhochstetter
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org



___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-02-11 Thread Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot
Sorry for a long reply too. About mrc.bin: no, it's actually possible 
to use mrc blob on Sandy/Ivy, but as I see it's not supported across 
all boards. X220 has support, other boards needs patching (or maybe 
patches are already on gerrit, I'm not sure). It shouldn't be hard to 
get it working, though. 
Can you elaborate on this one? Why does the X220 has support and other 
Sandy/IvyBridge based laptops are not supported? Wasn't one of the 
ideas for coreboot to have a more common code base or am I missing 
something obvious?
Basically, it's just not enabled in other boards' configs. I don't know 
why exactly it is enabled only in X220, but I can guess it's because the 
native raminit is preferable, works quite well and nobody needed mrc 
raminit on other models. You can try this patch 
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37153 on your T430.

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-02-11 Thread Lars Hochstetter
I managed to find some time to run memtest86+ v5.01 as a SeaBIOS payload 
[1].


As it turns out the RAM went bad - I made sure to check with another 
pair of sticks. I'll replace the RAM and retry the HT patch when my free 
time allows for it.


Sorry for creating so much noise over something so simple.

Regards

lhochstetter


[1] https://mail.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/2018-November/087713.html

On 2/8/20 4:23 PM, Lars Hochstetter wrote:
Unfortunately I'll be rather busy until mid April this year - here is 
my plan for the time being:


I'll reinstall Linux Mint Cinnamon, integrate memtest86+ into coreboot 
and run it. I'll report back if it's just bad RAM or something else.


Since my T430 was modified a couple times I'd also suggest we try to 
find someone with a more stock T430 to see if your HT patch works. The 
X230 somewhere in this thread worked and I'd argue that it does work 
properly on unmodified Thinkpads.


Sorry for a long reply too. About mrc.bin: no, it's actually possible 
to use mrc blob on Sandy/Ivy, but as I see it's not supported across 
all boards. X220 has support, other boards needs patching (or maybe 
patches are already on gerrit, I'm not sure). It shouldn't be hard to 
get it working, though. 
Can you elaborate on this one? Why does the X220 has support and other 
Sandy/IvyBridge based laptops are not supported? Wasn't one of the 
ideas for coreboot to have a more common code base or am I missing 
something obvious?


Regards

lhochstetter
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-02-08 Thread Lars Hochstetter
Unfortunately I'll be rather busy until mid April this year - here is my 
plan for the time being:


I'll reinstall Linux Mint Cinnamon, integrate memtest86+ into coreboot 
and run it. I'll report back if it's just bad RAM or something else.


Since my T430 was modified a couple times I'd also suggest we try to 
find someone with a more stock T430 to see if your HT patch works. The 
X230 somewhere in this thread worked and I'd argue that it does work 
properly on unmodified Thinkpads.


Sorry for a long reply too. About mrc.bin: no, it's actually possible 
to use mrc blob on Sandy/Ivy, but as I see it's not supported across 
all boards. X220 has support, other boards needs patching (or maybe 
patches are already on gerrit, I'm not sure). It shouldn't be hard to 
get it working, though. 
Can you elaborate on this one? Why does the X220 has support and other 
Sandy/IvyBridge based laptops are not supported? Wasn't one of the ideas 
for coreboot to have a more common code base or am I missing something 
obvious?


Regards

lhochstetter
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-02-07 Thread Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot



I personally don't think that libgfxinit instead of vgabios or vice 
versa will make any difference in this case. I'd recommend to test 
native raminit vs mrc.bin instead. 
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the mrc.bin Haswell specific [1]? 
From what I recall I never saw an option in "make menuconfig" to 
choose native raminit or mrc.bin on IvyBridge. If there is such an 
option (now) I'll definitely try it!


Sorry for a long reply too. About mrc.bin: no, it's actually possible to 
use mrc blob on Sandy/Ivy, but as I see it's not supported across all 
boards. X220 has support, other boards needs patching (or maybe patches 
are already on gerrit, I'm not sure). It shouldn't be hard to get it 
working, though.

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-02-07 Thread Lars Hochstetter

Sorry for the long wait - I was quite busy.

If it's so, then the HT patch is not to blame... But we'll see after 
your tests.
I hope I never claimed / implied that! If anything reducing the amount 
of threads (either through the patch or the nosmt kernel parameter) did 
improve stability when running Debian.


Onto the tests - I'm rather confused on how to interpret the results.

As stated before, I would test multiple setups with blobs (ifd, me, gbe) 
based on the Lenovo BIOS v2.81. I have omitted the vgabios test.


1. fully blob'ed with the me intact (CBFS size 0x70)

2. fully blob'ed with the me shrinked (CBFS size 0xBE5000)

I tested on two different Linux distributions.

(I build and flashed coreboot using a Raspberry Pi at a older master 
than the master used for testing)


*Debian Buster 10.2, Kernel 4.19.0, "old master"*
> I couldn't build the crossgcc-i386 with multiple threads or watch YT 
videos using Firefox. I eventually was fed up and decided to install 
Linux Mint 19.3 Cinnamon to make sure I didn't mess up something on my 
Debian install.


*Linux Mint 19.3 Cinnamon, Kernel 5.3.0, master @ 
1ab6f0c176c1aa6947bf0d3fbe0a213f316e9c67*
> I could build the crossgcc-i386 with multiple threads without issues. 
I could also watch Youtube videos using Firefox but at some point the 
system would become more or less randomly unstable or Cinnamon would 
crash / freeze. Namely when I watched videos in full screen mode. CPU 
temps seemed fine though. To rule out Cinnamon as an issue, I installed 
Linux Mint 19.3 XFCE.


*Linux Mint 19.3 XFCE, Kernel 5.0.0, master @ 
1ab6f0c176c1aa6947bf0d3fbe0a213f316e9c67*
> The first build of the crossgcc-i386 with multiple threads did 
produce some issues / the build could not be continued due to an error. 
After a crossgcc-clean the build completed just fine. I also got freezes 
when watching YT videos on Firefox namely in full screen mode.


I have attached my .config and a script + systemd unit which I use to 
reduce power draw of my T430 (all settings were suggested by powertop, 
aside from deactivating turbo boost).


---

I'm wondering if this is really an issue with coreboot / my Linux distro 
or rather hardware related ... I'm considering to throw memtest86+ [1] 
at the RAM and see if the RAM is working properly.


Regards

lhochstetter

[1] https://mail.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/2018-November/087713.html
#
# Automatically generated file; DO NOT EDIT.
# coreboot configuration
#

#
# General setup
#
CONFIG_COREBOOT_BUILD=y
CONFIG_LOCALVERSION=""
CONFIG_CBFS_PREFIX="fallback"
CONFIG_COMPILER_GCC=y
# CONFIG_COMPILER_LLVM_CLANG is not set
# CONFIG_ANY_TOOLCHAIN is not set
CONFIG_CCACHE=y
# CONFIG_FMD_GENPARSER is not set
# CONFIG_UTIL_GENPARSER is not set
CONFIG_USE_OPTION_TABLE=y
# CONFIG_STATIC_OPTION_TABLE is not set
CONFIG_COMPRESS_RAMSTAGE=y
CONFIG_INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE=y
CONFIG_COLLECT_TIMESTAMPS=y
# CONFIG_TIMESTAMPS_ON_CONSOLE is not set
CONFIG_USE_BLOBS=y
# CONFIG_USE_AMD_BLOBS is not set
# CONFIG_COVERAGE is not set
# CONFIG_UBSAN is not set
CONFIG_RELOCATABLE_RAMSTAGE=y
# CONFIG_NO_STAGE_CACHE is not set
CONFIG_TSEG_STAGE_CACHE=y
# CONFIG_UPDATE_IMAGE is not set
# CONFIG_BOOTSPLASH_IMAGE is not set

#
# Mainboard
#

#
# Important: Run 'make distclean' before switching boards
#
# CONFIG_VENDOR_ADLINK is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_AMD is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_AOPEN is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_APPLE is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_ASROCK is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_ASUS is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_BAP is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_BIOSTAR is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_CAVIUM is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_COMPULAB is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_ELMEX is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_EMULATION is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_FACEBOOK is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_FOXCONN is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_GETAC is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_GIGABYTE is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_GIZMOSPHERE is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_GOOGLE is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_HP is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_IBASE is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_INTEL is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_JETWAY is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_KONTRON is not set
CONFIG_VENDOR_LENOVO=y
# CONFIG_VENDOR_LIPPERT is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_MSI is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_OPENCELLULAR is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_PACKARDBELL is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_PCENGINES is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_PORTWELL is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_PURISM is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_RAZER is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_RODA is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_SAMSUNG is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_SAPPHIRE is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_SCALEWAY is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_SIEMENS is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_SIFIVE is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_SUPERMICRO is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_TI is not set
# CONFIG_VENDOR_UP is not set
CONFIG_MAINBOARD_VENDOR="LENOVO"
CONFIG_BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS=y
CONFIG_MAINBOARD_DIR="lenovo/t430"
CONFIG_MAINBOARD_PART_NUMBER="ThinkPad T430"
CONFIG_MAX_CPUS=8
CONFIG_ONBOARD_VGA_IS_PRIMARY=y
CONFIG_DIMM_SPD_SIZE=256
# CONFIG_VGA_BIOS is not set
CONFIG_VGA_BIOS_ID="8086,0166"

[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-01-18 Thread Lars Hochstetter
I personally don't think that libgfxinit instead of vgabios or vice 
versa will make any difference in this case. I'd recommend to test 
native raminit vs mrc.bin instead. 
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the mrc.bin Haswell specific [1]? From 
what I recall I never saw an option in "make menuconfig" to choose 
native raminit or mrc.bin on IvyBridge. If there is such an option (now) 
I'll definitely try it!


If you mean microcode updates, then there's an option in coreboot's 
config (and you also need to enable use of binary-only repository in 
the General section). 
In terms of microcode updates I'm concerned about "compability", i.e. 
does Debian use an older / newer version than coreboot and vice versa, 
is there some specific initialization done by Debian / coreboot which 
the other one does not perform etc.


[1] https://doc.coreboot.org/northbridge/intel/haswell/mrc.bin.html

On 1/19/20 12:22 AM, Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot wrote:
From what I recall, the last coreboot master I tried resulted in 
crashes without your patch.
If it's so, then the HT patch is not to blame... But we'll see after 
your tests.
I intend to run following tests with the latest coreboot master (I'll 
note the commit hash and use the same commit for all of my tests) and 
SeaBIOS as payload (blobs will be extracted from the Lenovo OEM BIOS 
v2.81):


1. fully blob'ed (vgabios, ifd, me, gbe)
2. libgfxinit instead of vgabios
3. fully blob'ed with the me shrinked
4. libgfxinit instead of vgabios with the me shrinked
I personally don't think that libgfxinit instead of vgabios or vice 
versa will make any difference in this case. I'd recommend to test 
native raminit vs mrc.bin instead.
I'm unsure on how to provide the µCode patches, i.e. integrate them 
in coreboot or have them patched by Linux.
If you mean microcode updates, then there's an option in coreboot's 
config (and you also need to enable use of binary-only repository in 
the General section).

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-01-18 Thread Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot
From what I recall, the last coreboot master I tried resulted in 
crashes without your patch.
If it's so, then the HT patch is not to blame... But we'll see after 
your tests.
I intend to run following tests with the latest coreboot master (I'll 
note the commit hash and use the same commit for all of my tests) and 
SeaBIOS as payload (blobs will be extracted from the Lenovo OEM BIOS 
v2.81):


1. fully blob'ed (vgabios, ifd, me, gbe)
2. libgfxinit instead of vgabios
3. fully blob'ed with the me shrinked
4. libgfxinit instead of vgabios with the me shrinked
I personally don't think that libgfxinit instead of vgabios or vice 
versa will make any difference in this case. I'd recommend to test 
native raminit vs mrc.bin instead.
I'm unsure on how to provide the µCode patches, i.e. integrate them in 
coreboot or have them patched by Linux.
If you mean microcode updates, then there's an option in coreboot's 
config (and you also need to enable use of binary-only repository in the 
General section).

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-01-18 Thread Lars Hochstetter

Hi Evgeny,

I didn't try the latest coreboot master in a while as I wanted to rule 
out hardware damage as a possible cause and reflashed the Lenovo OEM BIOS.


From what I recall, the last coreboot master I tried resulted in 
crashes without your patch.


I intend to run following tests with the latest coreboot master (I'll 
note the commit hash and use the same commit for all of my tests) and 
SeaBIOS as payload (blobs will be extracted from the Lenovo OEM BIOS v2.81):


1. fully blob'ed (vgabios, ifd, me, gbe)
2. libgfxinit instead of vgabios
3. fully blob'ed with the me shrinked
4. libgfxinit instead of vgabios with the me shrinked

If all tests pass, I'll try the same tests with your patch. If a test 
without your patch applied fails I'd argue that something else is to blame.


I'm unsure on how to provide the µCode patches, i.e. integrate them in 
coreboot or have them patched by Linux.


Since watching videos on Firefox and compiling the coreboot toolchain 
seem to reliably crash the laptop I'll use those to try and provoke a 
crash. I'm open to suggestions for other "crash provoking workloads".


I'm also considering reinstalling the OS (Debian Buster 10.2 with 
Gnome3) to rule out some weird configuration as a possibility.


On 1/17/20 12:37 AM, Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot wrote:

Hi, Lars.

Update: I flashed the original Lenovo BIOS v2.81 (with keyboard EC 
mod) and the issues seem to be gone.
Do you have any freezes/crashes while running latest coreboot (from 
master) without the HT patch?

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2020-01-16 Thread Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot

Hi, Lars.

Update: I flashed the original Lenovo BIOS v2.81 (with keyboard EC 
mod) and the issues seem to be gone.
Do you have any freezes/crashes while running latest coreboot (from 
master) without the HT patch?

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2019-12-25 Thread Lars Hochstetter
Update: I flashed the original Lenovo BIOS v2.81 (with keyboard EC mod) 
and the issues seem to be gone. Additionally the RAM now runs with 
2133MHz without the system freezing and I also can compile crossgcc-i386 
with CPUS=8 without issues. Watching videos on YT using Firefox works, too.


The Intel ME is also back. Could there be an issue with the system 
initialization done by the Intel ME which does not occur if the Intel ME 
is fully functional?


On 12/24/19 1:14 PM, Lars Hochstetter wrote:
There are some similarities: the system freezes (i.e. UI is 
unresponsive, you have to hold down the power button to reset the 
system) and sometimes it outright crashes into a reboot. The crashes 
seem to trigger when the CPU is running high loads - take note though: 
with your HT option patch I could run the stress tests of the CoreFreq 
(https://github.com/cyring/CoreFreq) tool without crashes / freezes 
but I only tried for a couple minutes.


I do get crashes sometimes when I compile crossgcc-i386 
(CPUS=$(nproc), with and without HT enabled through nosmt in the GRUB 
config) but more often make runs into some error and simply won't 
compile the sources (I notice a certain tendency towards the gcc 
compilation) - I would usually recompile but it now seems to be more 
persistent. There seems to be also a good chance to crash when the CPU 
isn't fully loaded but multiple applications are open - most notably 
Firefox when watching Youtube videos and doing something in another 
application / Firefox tab.


Originally I was running coreboot v4.6, then changed to v4.8.1 then 
v4.9, then for some time to master (blobs were based on BIOS v2.79, me 
disabled and neutered). I'd argue that the issues started appearing 
after my switch to v4.11. However I can not rule out hardware issues, 
as I overtightened the screws on the heatsink last time I was working 
on my T430 - maybe the overtightening caused physical damage to some 
solder joints on the CPU / socket.


Here are some system stats:

CPU: i7-3840QM, TurboBoost is disabled through the intel_pstate driver 
to prevent my laptop from melting
RAM: HyperX 2x8GB 2133MHz DDR3 1.35V HX321LS11IB2K2/16, it runs at 
1600MHz (the "ignore fuses" option isn't set) though as the system 
would freeze shortly after logging in

Mainboard: no dGPU variant
OS: Debian 10.2 64bit with the default Gnome3 DE
Mods: the 7 row keyboard mod and the FHD screen mod (maybe that is why 
I didn't see any visual artifacts)
coreboot blobs (ifd, me, gbe): based on BIOS v2.81, me is neutered and 
disabled


I managed to capture following dmesg, when the system soft locked 
while Firefox was open and I managed to switch to a tty. If I recall 
correctly there was some audio repetition.


[  926.163124] ISO 9660 Extensions: RRIP_1991A
[ 1094.740789] usb 1-1.2: USB disconnect, device number 8
[ 1267.534956] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 
f60050b36388

[ 1267.534960] PGD 4617e2067 P4D 4617e2067 PUD 0
[ 1267.534964] Oops:  [#1] SMP PTI
[ 1267.534966] CPU: 2 PID: 5953 Comm: Compositor Tainted: G   
OE 4.19.0-6-amd64 #1 Debian 4.19.67-2+deb10u2
[ 1267.534967] Hardware name: LENOVO 2347CM9/2347CM9, BIOS CBET4000 
4.11 11/19/2019

[ 1267.534973] RIP: 0010:filemap_map_pages+0x9a/0x3a0
[ 1267.534974] Code: ff 0f 84 65 01 00 00 4c 39 6c 24 20 0f 87 77 01 
00 00 49 8b 0f 48 85 c9 0f 84 cc 00 00 00 48 89 c8 83 e0 03 0f 85 cb 
02 00 00 <48> 8b 41 08 48 8d 78 ff a8 01 48 0f 44 f9 8b 47 34 85 c0 74 
d3 8d

[ 1267.534976] RSP: :b032825dfd88 EFLAGS: 00010246
[ 1267.534977] RAX:  RBX: 0480 RCX: 
f60050b36380
[ 1267.534978] RDX: 0001 RSI: 003b RDI: 
00045d859067
[ 1267.534979] RBP: 0001 R08: 00042cd8d000 R09: 
93eb2bdd1da8
[ 1267.534980] R10: 01c0 R11: 0185 R12: 
93eb580a9518
[ 1267.534981] R13: 018a R14: b032825dfe18 R15: 
93eb2bdd1e00
[ 1267.534983] FS:  7f41b308d700() GS:93eb6128() 
knlGS:

[ 1267.534984] CS:  0010 DS:  ES:  CR0: 80050033
[ 1267.534985] CR2: f60050b36388 CR3: 0004584be004 CR4: 
001606e0

[ 1267.534986] Call Trace:
[ 1267.534992]  __handle_mm_fault+0x1030/0x1270
[ 1267.534995]  handle_mm_fault+0xd6/0x200
[ 1267.534997]  __do_page_fault+0x249/0x4f0
[ 1267.535001]  ? page_fault+0x8/0x30
[ 1267.535002]  page_fault+0x1e/0x30
[ 1267.535005] RIP: 0033:0x7f41c7abe284
[ 1267.535006] Code: 29 4f 10 0f 29 57 20 0f 29 5f 30 48 83 c7 40 48 
83 fa 40 77 d0 0f 11 29 0f 11 71 f0 0f 11 79 e0 44 0f 11 41 d0 41 0f 
11 23 c3 <0f> 10 26 0f 10 6e 10 0f 10 76 20 0f 10 7e 30 44 0f 10 44 16 
f0 4c

[ 1267.535007] RSP: 002b:7f41b3089788 EFLAGS: 00010202
[ 1267.535009] RAX: 7f418f9b5600 RBX: 7f418f9b5600 RCX: 
7f418f9b5600
[ 1267.535010] RDX: 0194 RSI: 7f417f8a11c0 RDI: 
7f418f9b5600
[ 1267.535011] RBP: 7f41b308a150 R08: 0065 R09: 

[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2019-12-24 Thread Lars Hochstetter
There are some similarities: the system freezes (i.e. UI is 
unresponsive, you have to hold down the power button to reset the 
system) and sometimes it outright crashes into a reboot. The crashes 
seem to trigger when the CPU is running high loads - take note though: 
with your HT option patch I could run the stress tests of the CoreFreq 
(https://github.com/cyring/CoreFreq) tool without crashes / freezes but 
I only tried for a couple minutes.


I do get crashes sometimes when I compile crossgcc-i386 (CPUS=$(nproc), 
with and without HT enabled through nosmt in the GRUB config) but more 
often make runs into some error and simply won't compile the sources (I 
notice a certain tendency towards the gcc compilation) - I would usually 
recompile but it now seems to be more persistent. There seems to be also 
a good chance to crash when the CPU isn't fully loaded but multiple 
applications are open - most notably Firefox when watching Youtube 
videos and doing something in another application / Firefox tab.


Originally I was running coreboot v4.6, then changed to v4.8.1 then 
v4.9, then for some time to master (blobs were based on BIOS v2.79, me 
disabled and neutered). I'd argue that the issues started appearing 
after my switch to v4.11. However I can not rule out hardware issues, as 
I overtightened the screws on the heatsink last time I was working on my 
T430 - maybe the overtightening caused physical damage to some solder 
joints on the CPU / socket.


Here are some system stats:

CPU: i7-3840QM, TurboBoost is disabled through the intel_pstate driver 
to prevent my laptop from melting
RAM: HyperX 2x8GB 2133MHz DDR3 1.35V HX321LS11IB2K2/16, it runs at 
1600MHz (the "ignore fuses" option isn't set) though as the system would 
freeze shortly after logging in

Mainboard: no dGPU variant
OS: Debian 10.2 64bit with the default Gnome3 DE
Mods: the 7 row keyboard mod and the FHD screen mod (maybe that is why I 
didn't see any visual artifacts)
coreboot blobs (ifd, me, gbe): based on BIOS v2.81, me is neutered and 
disabled


I managed to capture following dmesg, when the system soft locked while 
Firefox was open and I managed to switch to a tty. If I recall correctly 
there was some audio repetition.


[  926.163124] ISO 9660 Extensions: RRIP_1991A
[ 1094.740789] usb 1-1.2: USB disconnect, device number 8
[ 1267.534956] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 
f60050b36388

[ 1267.534960] PGD 4617e2067 P4D 4617e2067 PUD 0
[ 1267.534964] Oops:  [#1] SMP PTI
[ 1267.534966] CPU: 2 PID: 5953 Comm: Compositor Tainted: G   
OE 4.19.0-6-amd64 #1 Debian 4.19.67-2+deb10u2
[ 1267.534967] Hardware name: LENOVO 2347CM9/2347CM9, BIOS CBET4000 4.11 
11/19/2019

[ 1267.534973] RIP: 0010:filemap_map_pages+0x9a/0x3a0
[ 1267.534974] Code: ff 0f 84 65 01 00 00 4c 39 6c 24 20 0f 87 77 01 00 
00 49 8b 0f 48 85 c9 0f 84 cc 00 00 00 48 89 c8 83 e0 03 0f 85 cb 02 00 
00 <48> 8b 41 08 48 8d 78 ff a8 01 48 0f 44 f9 8b 47 34 85 c0 74 d3 8d

[ 1267.534976] RSP: :b032825dfd88 EFLAGS: 00010246
[ 1267.534977] RAX:  RBX: 0480 RCX: 
f60050b36380
[ 1267.534978] RDX: 0001 RSI: 003b RDI: 
00045d859067
[ 1267.534979] RBP: 0001 R08: 00042cd8d000 R09: 
93eb2bdd1da8
[ 1267.534980] R10: 01c0 R11: 0185 R12: 
93eb580a9518
[ 1267.534981] R13: 018a R14: b032825dfe18 R15: 
93eb2bdd1e00
[ 1267.534983] FS:  7f41b308d700() GS:93eb6128() 
knlGS:

[ 1267.534984] CS:  0010 DS:  ES:  CR0: 80050033
[ 1267.534985] CR2: f60050b36388 CR3: 0004584be004 CR4: 
001606e0

[ 1267.534986] Call Trace:
[ 1267.534992]  __handle_mm_fault+0x1030/0x1270
[ 1267.534995]  handle_mm_fault+0xd6/0x200
[ 1267.534997]  __do_page_fault+0x249/0x4f0
[ 1267.535001]  ? page_fault+0x8/0x30
[ 1267.535002]  page_fault+0x1e/0x30
[ 1267.535005] RIP: 0033:0x7f41c7abe284
[ 1267.535006] Code: 29 4f 10 0f 29 57 20 0f 29 5f 30 48 83 c7 40 48 83 
fa 40 77 d0 0f 11 29 0f 11 71 f0 0f 11 79 e0 44 0f 11 41 d0 41 0f 11 23 
c3 <0f> 10 26 0f 10 6e 10 0f 10 76 20 0f 10 7e 30 44 0f 10 44 16 f0 4c

[ 1267.535007] RSP: 002b:7f41b3089788 EFLAGS: 00010202
[ 1267.535009] RAX: 7f418f9b5600 RBX: 7f418f9b5600 RCX: 
7f418f9b5600
[ 1267.535010] RDX: 0194 RSI: 7f417f8a11c0 RDI: 
7f418f9b5600
[ 1267.535011] RBP: 7f41b308a150 R08: 0065 R09: 
7f41c0f50030
[ 1267.535012] R10: 7f41c0efaa90 R11: 7f418f9b3984 R12: 
1e00
[ 1267.535013] R13: 0093 R14: 0065 R15: 

[ 1267.535014] Modules linked in: isofs uas usb_storage xt_conntrack 
ipt_MASQUERADE nf_conntrack_netlink xfrm_user xfrm_algo nft_counter 
xt_addrtype nft_compat nft_chain_nat_ipv4 nf_nat_ipv4 nf_nat 
nf_conntrack nf_defrag_ipv6 nf_defrag_ipv4 libcrc32c nf_tables nfnetlink 
br_netfilter bridge stp llc ctr ccm fuse aufs(OE) 

[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2019-12-23 Thread Andrey Korolyov
>
> Do these crashes/freezes look like
> https://ticket.coreboot.org/issues/121?


Sorry for potential thread hijack, did anyone observed vendor's clock
generator setup on these models? I remember seeing exactly the same
behavior with z61t when I borrowed clock generator setup from neighbor
model, everything was fine until OS was booted and idled to C3. Though CPU
are quite different, the problem might lie in the same area :)
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2019-12-23 Thread Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot
I however also noticed severe freezes / crashes (OS Debian 10.2) but 
I'm unsure if they are related to the patch or something different.
Have you got any logs? Do these crashes/freezes look like 
https://ticket.coreboot.org/issues/121?

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2019-12-23 Thread Lars Hochstetter

Hi,

I second that - my i7-3840qm shows only 4 of its original 8 threads when 
hyper_threading is set to Disable and its full 8 threads when I set it 
to Enable.


I however also noticed severe freezes / crashes (OS Debian 10.2) but I'm 
unsure if they are related to the patch or something different.


I was considering testing a identical replacement board and another CPU 
as soon as some additional parts arrive.


I'll come back to you if I know more.

Regards

lhochstetter

On 12/21/19 9:57 AM, mkope...@gmail.com wrote:

Hi,

The patch seems to work correctly for me on X230. I get 2 CPUs with 
hyper_threading set to Disable and 4 with the option set to Enable.
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2019-12-21 Thread mkopec12
Hi,

The patch seems to work correctly for me on X230. I get 2 CPUs with 
hyper_threading set to Disable and 4 with the option set to Enable.
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2019-12-20 Thread Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot

OK, I've just updated the patch.

Use "hyper_threading" CMOS option to switch it on and off. (Don't forget 
to enable CMOS support.)


On 12/19/19 10:25 AM, Jose Trujillo via coreboot wrote:

Hello:

I am also interested and will help test and I think it will be the best to 
leave it as CMOS option.

Thank you
Jose.

Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Tuesday, December 17, 2019 5:12 PM, Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot 
 wrote:


Hi.

As for HT, there's this patch:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/29669 but it needs polishing
and testing. Last time I touched it, it worked good (or so it seemed to
me) on X220. If you have an interest and wish help to test, we could
finish it.

(We also need to decide, whether to leave it as a CMOS option or turn
into a Kconfig option.)

On 15.12.2019 15:57, Lars Hochstetter wrote:


Hi everyone,
I'm looking for an option to configure my Intel IvyBridge CPU (enable
/ disable Hyperthreading, TurboBoost, set configurable TDP level etc.)
using coreboot / nvramcui. My board is a Lenovo Thinkpad T430. So far,
"only virtualization" is configurable and can not be enabled /
disabled "in flight" but requires a rebuild of coreboot.
Is anyone currently working on something similar?
Is anything planned in that regard?
Kind regards
lhochstetter

coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2019-12-19 Thread Michał Kopeć
Hello,

I am interested in this patch and would like to help test. I have an X230 and 
a T430 available for testing. I also believe leaving it as a CMOS option would 
be best.

Kind regards,
Michał

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2019-12-18 Thread Jose Trujillo via coreboot
Hello:

I am also interested and will help test and I think it will be the best to 
leave it as CMOS option.

Thank you
Jose.

Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Tuesday, December 17, 2019 5:12 PM, Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot 
 wrote:

> Hi.
>
> As for HT, there's this patch:
> https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/29669 but it needs polishing
> and testing. Last time I touched it, it worked good (or so it seemed to
> me) on X220. If you have an interest and wish help to test, we could
> finish it.
>
> (We also need to decide, whether to leave it as a CMOS option or turn
> into a Kconfig option.)
>
> On 15.12.2019 15:57, Lars Hochstetter wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> > I'm looking for an option to configure my Intel IvyBridge CPU (enable
> > / disable Hyperthreading, TurboBoost, set configurable TDP level etc.)
> > using coreboot / nvramcui. My board is a Lenovo Thinkpad T430. So far,
> > "only virtualization" is configurable and can not be enabled /
> > disabled "in flight" but requires a rebuild of coreboot.
> > Is anyone currently working on something similar?
> > Is anything planned in that regard?
> > Kind regards
> > lhochstetter
> >
> > coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org
>
> coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org


[coreboot] Re: Extended IvyBridge CPU configuration

2019-12-17 Thread Evgeny Zinoviev via coreboot

Hi.

As for HT, there's this patch: 
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/29669 but it needs polishing 
and testing. Last time I touched it, it worked good (or so it seemed to 
me) on X220. If you have an interest and wish help to test, we could 
finish it.


(We also need to decide, whether to leave it as a CMOS option or turn 
into a Kconfig option.)


On 15.12.2019 15:57, Lars Hochstetter wrote:

Hi everyone,

I'm looking for an option to configure my Intel IvyBridge CPU (enable 
/ disable Hyperthreading, TurboBoost, set configurable TDP level etc.) 
using coreboot / nvramcui. My board is a Lenovo Thinkpad T430. So far, 
"only virtualization" is configurable and can not be enabled / 
disabled "in flight" but requires a rebuild of coreboot.


Is anyone currently working on something similar?

Is anything planned in that regard?

Kind regards

lhochstetter
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org