-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 578
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
update-amd-tdp #13157
Open
Mikhailzrick
wants to merge
1
commit into
batocera-linux:master
Choose a base branch
from
Mikhailzrick:update-amd-tdp
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
update-amd-tdp #13157
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why did you remove the thermal control -
--tctl-temp=95
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To allow for bios control. Or rather default to bios controlled. Hard coding it in batocera makes it override any bios setting whereas allowing bios control will still default to 95c on most chips without overriding any user bios settings. There is the possibility of PR’ing a user set temp slider in the future. But I am not sure that needs to be in es_features at least not for per system/per game. Maybe either in just the global game settings or maybe even dev menu.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No we want to set a higher threshold and not another slider either. add it back in.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A higher threshold? I don’t understand. But if there’s no chance of having a user defined slider for temp limit in the future I definitely do not want it hard coded and would prefer to have the bios control temp limits. Many mini pc’s can get noisy at max fan speeds and the easiest solution is to limit the temp via the bios.
One of the main reasons for this PR is to default to bios settings while still allowing a user to set tdp parameters, hard coding something like the temp limit just seems unnecessary.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is the bios controlled temp limit lower than 95c for some handhelds? I’m approaching this from a general APU pov where the default bios temp limit is already 95c. If this is something specific to certain handhelds maybe it should just be applied for the specified devices in the handheld dictionary list otherwise if it’s an unknown/generic device the temp limit is not set?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What it does is allow the higher TDP up to 95 degrees. This is still within a safety margin rather than a system setting. Most BIOS' don't set a threshold it's handled by normal CPU scaling. We don't need another vague slider.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have several amd apu systems that allow bios control of cpu thermal limits. It’s a common amd bios setting like PBO, setting PPT, EDC, TDC, and curve optimizer.
I fundamentally disagree with taking away users ability to control their own hardware by forcing a hard coded software implementation, even going so far as overwriting a users desired bios settings.
If there’s a specific use case for setting a higher than default bios determined temp limit for certain hardware I think that’s fair and we can work to accommodate that, otherwise I’m still seeing this as a situation where something that was previously under user control is being taken away with no benefit in exchange.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The benefit is that most users won't set it in the bios or even know about it. It also allows for their intended TDP to last longer.
You had no issues using this default before this minor refactor. There have been no reported problems either. Other distributions also set this variable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I never used it, I disabled the feature when it was implemented because it was overwriting my bios settings. I’m admittedly a power user, and I know my hardware better than anyone else, but I don’t think it’s right to completely exclude power users like myself just because the average user won’t ever change it, especially if there’s no beneficial gain from the exclusion.
Let me try to understand this from a different angle. What evidence is there that a hard coded temp limit is needed? I need to see numbers to understand.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A potential compromise might be to guarantee that ryzenadj is only applied for handhelds and excludes any generic devices with AMD APU’s like mini pc’s, desktops, laptops, etc. I don’t immediately know how I’d do that but it’s a thought.