Closed Rimits closed 2 years ago
It is not normal and dual EPYC is barely never tested; before your screenshot.
Need to debug: send you code changes; is your dual socket platform available for experimentation ?
Cores
watt is the sum of all physical Core threads. Logical SMT Cores are excluded from the sum. Package
watt is sourced from hardware registerWithout better specs, I think Package
refers to one socket.
This might explain the issue.
Of course, I can do some experiments on that server.
The 279W of cores power could be accurate, because the BMC shows the current and voltage of VRM_CPU0 are 142A and 0.94V.
Package watt seems accurate too since the cpu is limited to 225W.
Maybe appending a "0" to the Package
label will fix the misleading situation.
The same goes the 480W TDP and 240W PL2.
The label Package0
is a good suggestion.
You can also target the second socket for a Package
watt reading.
You'll have to bind the CoreFreq Service Processor to a CPU which belongs to second socket.
Topology
to find a CPU of second socket. Let's say 64
insmod corefreqk.ko ServiceProcessor=64
3. Please provides a screenshot of the `Power` view
Remarks:
* I'm presuming Package0 and Package1 should slightly differ ?
* When not specified, Service Processor is selected according to kernel scheduling
* Service Processor can be assigned to any socket
* If CPU is disabled, Service Processor is auto migrated by driver
* UI is always highlighting the CPU number of the Service Processor and its SMT, (and the Hybrid with Intel 12th gen.)
Of course, I can do some experiments on that server. The 279W of cores power could be accurate, because the BMC shows the current and voltage of VRM_CPU0 are 142A and 0.94V. Package watt seems accurate too since the cpu is limited to 225W. Maybe appending a "0" to the
Package
label will fix the misleading situation.
0.94V
in your readings is during idle case
Computing from my Matisse voltage of 1.48 V
(instant load voltage) and your Rome current of 142A
, I'm getting a consumed power P = V x I
of ~ 210W
Topology:
---------------------------------- Topology ----------------------------------
CPU Pkg Apic Core/Thread Caches (w)rite-Back (i)nclusive
# ID ID CCD CCX ID/ID L1-Inst Way L1-Data Way L2 Way L3 Way
000:BSP 0 0 0 0 0 32 8 32 8 512 8 i 131072 16w
001: 0 2 0 0 1 0 32 8 32 8 512 8 i 131072 16w
...
031: 0 62 6 7 31 0 32 8 32 8 512 8 i 131072 16w
032: 1 128 0 0 0 0 32 8 32 8 512 8 i 131072 16w
033: 1 130 0 0 1 0 32 8 32 8 512 8 i 131072 16w
...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reload: insmod corefreqk.ko ServiceProcessor=32
Result:
When Service Processor is 19:
They are slightly different, since CPU2 is cooler and the frequency is higher.
For your information, below specs of the two Power
registers (RAPL):
Hello,
Can you try this attached version where the Package ID is appended to label.
Should print 0
or 1
depending of your selected Service Processor.
Two UI views are impacted:
And two CLI outputs are impacted:
corefreq-cli -C
corefreq-cli -w
[EDIT] Remark: Custom view is a problem. I don't find enough space in its footer line.
Thx, it's less confusing now.
Meanwhile I have enhanced the Custom
view
CoreFreq_develop.tar.gz
well, you do have a fast hand🚴
well, you do have a fast handbicyclist ![截屏_20220810-171014]
Thank you.
I'll leave those changes in the develop
branch for a short while; making sure no regression happens on other systems.
Is it normal or a bug that Core Power 279W is greater than Package Power 210W ?
OS:ubuntu 20.04 CoreFreq version: 1.91.5 CPU: epyc 7542 *2 Motherboard: Gigabyte![截屏_20220810-105720](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/42634955/183816169-c065b6c6-94e8-4525-854a-a816cf05e228.png)