Skip to contentSkip to conversation

CPUFreq chokes on Sempron

fwd Andi Kleen 2 participants 2 messages Jan 9, 2005

lore
Share & tools
lore

Andi Kleen

author
#0 lore raw

FYI.

When loading the powernow-k8 module on any recent kernel (I've tried 2.6.8 through 2.6.10) on my Sempron laptop, I see:

powernow-k8: Found 1 AMD Athlon 64 / Opteron processors (version 1.00.09e)
powernow-k8:    0 : fid 0x8 (1600 MHz), vid 0x6 (1400 mV)
powernow-k8:    1 : fid 0x0 (800 MHz), vid 0x18 (950 mV)

cpu_init done, current fid 0x8, vid 0x4
powernow-k8: vid trans failed, vid 0x3, curr 0x4
powernow-k8: transition frequency failed
powernow-k8: vid trans failed, vid 0x3, curr 0x4
powernow-k8: transition frequency failed

... and many more of those 'vid trans failed' errors (one every time there's an attempted freq change).

There is a small patch available at...
http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-3585.html
...which seems to fix the problem. Should this be included into the kernel officially?

Signature · 1 line
Matthew Trent

_______________________________________________
Cpufreq mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cpufreq

#1 lore raw
Quoted 16 lines

From: Matthew Trent <[email protected]>
Subject: CPUFreq chokes on Sempron
Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:09:01 -0800

When loading the powernow-k8 module on any recent kernel (I've tried 2.6.8 through 2.6.10) on my Sempron laptop, I see:

powernow-k8: Found 1 AMD Athlon 64 / Opteron processors (version 1.00.09e)
powernow-k8:    0 : fid 0x8 (1600 MHz), vid 0x6 (1400 mV)
powernow-k8:    1 : fid 0x0 (800 MHz), vid 0x18 (950 mV)

cpu_init done, current fid 0x8, vid 0x4
powernow-k8: vid trans failed, vid 0x3, curr 0x4
powernow-k8: transition frequency failed
powernow-k8: vid trans failed, vid 0x3, curr 0x4
powernow-k8: transition frequency failed

Quoted 7 lines

... and many more of those 'vid trans failed' errors (one every time there's an attempted freq change).

There is a small patch available at...
http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-3585.html
...which seems to fix the problem. Should this be included into the kernel officially?

It is already "queued" in Dave Jones' cpufreq bitkeeper tree for inclusion into the mainline kernel, and thus is already in 2.6.10-mm2.

Thanks,
Dominik