Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Updated AMD P-State Driver Posted For Improving Linux Power Efficiency

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by mlau View Post
    if you have "amd_cppc" in /proc/cpuinfo after applying this patchset, the driver should work out of the box on 4700u (which is also renoir, so my guess is yes).
    Also file "/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy0/scaling_driver" should contain "amd-pstate" if your bios is also fine.
    On an idle system you should see a lot of cores at around 500MHz instead of 2000MHz as is with acpi-cpufreq.
    Thanks for your answer.
    I managed to download the patch (although there is no clear download indicator in git.kernel.org as in github).
    Why does a simple patch weighs 1.1 GB? It's larger than the kernel...
    But then I have no clue how to apply such a patch!
    I looked up and it seems to be done with some patch -p1 command blah blah, but after I eventually managed to start that command properly, it's asking me too many questions of which I have no clue what to answer and I ended this agony before making a mistake I will regret.
    It seems to require a 5 pages user manual in order to apply this which is overly complicated in my opinion as I'd much rather spend my time outdoors than spending another half hour trying to figure out something as complicated as learning Chinese. So it may be best if I wait for this to be easier to enable.
    Nevertheless, thanks for the information. Others will probably have a good use of it.
    Last edited by Mez'; 20 November 2021, 10:50 AM.

    Comment


    • #22
      I did try it with my 3950X

      I blacklisted acpi_cpufreq from loading and I got to load amd-pstate with the shared memory option.
      I did not see a difference, minimum clock was like 3500 and voltage about 1.4xV using performance or shedutils.

      Also ondemand and Conservative would not work, just get an error when I did try to switch to one of theses.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by Mez' View Post
        Thanks for your answer.
        I managed to download the patch (although there is no clear download indicator in git.kernel.org as in github).
        Why does a simple patch weighs 1.1 GB? It's larger than the kernel...
        But then I have no clue how to apply such a patch!
        I looked up and it seems to be done with some patch -p1 command blah blah, but after I eventually managed to start that command properly, it's asking me too many questions of which I have no clue what to answer and I ended this agony before making a mistake I will regret.
        It seems to require a 5 pages user manual in order to apply this which is overly complicated in my opinion as I'd much rather spend my time outdoors than spending another half hour trying to figure out something as complicated as learning Chinese. So it may be best if I wait for this to be easier to enable.
        Nevertheless, thanks for the information. Others will probably have a good use of it.
        Why this passive-aggressive tone? Nobody forced you to do it. If you don't know how to work with source code, download and apply patches, that's no one's problem but yours.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by intelfx View Post

          Why this passive-aggressive tone? Nobody forced you to do it. If you don't know how to work with source code, download and apply patches, that's no one's problem but yours.
          I totally disagree.
          1. Info is all over the place because...
          2. There is no decent tutorial (which would be no bother if it weren't so...)
          3. It is too complicated
          I have been using Linux for 15 years, and for the last 12 years exclusively, yet it seems overly complicated for me to apply a simple kernel patch (while I can easily build a package and solve issues), because the info is lacking.
          I can only imagine what beginners must feel.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by Mez' View Post
            I totally disagree.
            1. Info is all over the place because...
            2. There is no decent tutorial (which would be no bother if it weren't so...)
            3. It is too complicated
            I have been using Linux for 15 years, and for the last 12 years exclusively, yet it seems overly complicated for me to apply a simple kernel patch (while I can easily build a package and solve issues), because the info is lacking.
            I can only imagine what beginners must feel.
            1) This is still in development
            2) This is still in development
            3) This is still in development

            You may have been using Linux for a long time, but apparently you don't understand the difference between stable and development code. This is not intended for the average user, only those comfortable with messing around with kernel source code. You say you found the patch and it was 1.1 GB. That's straight up wrong, whatever you downloaded wasn't the patch. I would link it to you but honestly if you somehow think that the 1.1 GB file that you downloaded is actually the kernel patch in question, I don't think you would even know what to do with it.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by jeoshua View Post

              1) This is still in development
              2) This is still in development
              3) This is still in development

              You may have been using Linux for a long time, but apparently you don't understand the difference between stable and development code. This is not intended for the average user, only those comfortable with messing around with kernel source code. You say you found the patch and it was 1.1 GB. That's straight up wrong, whatever you downloaded wasn't the patch. I would link it to you but honestly if you somehow think that the 1.1 GB file that you downloaded is actually the kernel patch in question, I don't think you would even know what to do with it.
              It's so ridiculously complicated to find a link to the patch that I'm not sure if I downloaded it right.
              From what I made out of this horrible UI of git.kernel.org, the patch is 200 MB expanding into 1.1 GB.
              https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux...-dev-v4.tar.gz

              Just put a clear download tab or button in the summary or tree.

              And indeed I don't know what to do with it, because it's not properly explained in tutorials (or with so many variants and exceptions that it's not a streamlined process) or in the README.
              I perfectly understand the difference between stable and development. I'm not saying this patch should be ready. I'm saying there should be a straightforward procedure to install such patches, and this has nothing to do with them being in development or with this one. You understood me wrong and your 1., 2. ,3. is a clear example that you did as I was discussing patch applying and not THIS patch specifically.
              I can tinker with anything, I always find a way. I could have spent 4h of my weekend and I would have figured this out. But I went outside and did rewarding stuff instead of geeking.
              Don't get me wrong, it's not very important, I can wait it out and there's no harm done here. I was just frustrated that it's not a 10 minutes thing, whereas it should be. It should be easier to apply such patches, as easy as building a package. Why do we always make things so complicated in the Linux world? :-)

              Is it this hard to get a high level process?
              1. Where to download and what (the patch and not the whole tree)
              2. How to apply (gzip -cd file.tar.gz | patch -p1)
              3. The actual command to patch a file (diff --git blah blah)
              4. What files to patch (including should I retro-apply files from earlier version of patches, in this case v1, v2 and v3)

              I shouldn't need to go on the Arch wiki, or some askUbuntu, StackExchange, Stackoverflow questions just to know how to apply a patch.
              Last edited by Mez'; 22 November 2021, 05:57 AM.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by stormcrow View Post

                My bet would be on HP's sometimes screwy ACPI tables. Laptops of any brand are notorious for those, however.
                Yes, the problem is here:
                Code:
                the _CPC object is not present in SBIOS

                Comment


                • #28
                  Anybody knows what it takes to get the power display in s-tui working? Or to monitor power in any other way, if possible for a Zen2 CPU? TIA

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by Mez' View Post
                    I perfectly understand the difference between stable and development. I'm not saying this patch should be ready. I'm saying there should be a straightforward procedure to install such patches
                    Why would you say that?

                    Let me let you in on a little secret. One of the reasons this stuff isn't trivial for just anybody to download and apply is that they don't want 1000 random people on the internet doing that, because they still need to have this code reviewed by experts before getting hundreds of bug reports from people on code they are going to change anyway. The people who are going to be helpful to this process know how to do it, everyone who doesn't is just noise that would cause them more work and slow things down.

                    Making it difficult to install is a feature, not a bug.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by indepe View Post
                      Anybody knows what it takes to get the power display in s-tui working? Or to monitor power in any other way, if possible for a Zen2 CPU? TIA
                      Have you tried running s-tui with sudo? For me it only shows CPU power usage when running elevated.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X