Due to an influx of spam, we have had to impose restrictions on new accounts. Please see this wiki page for instructions on how to get full permissions. Sorry for the inconvenience.
I have a suggestion for more power savings when using power-profiles-daemon.
When using the Power Saver profile in power-profiles-daemon, the energy_performance_preference defined in /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/energy_performance_preference should be set to balance_power or for more strict savings, power.
Currently, the EPP remains at performance even in power saver mode:
we have this function which appears to aim to set the epp preference for amd-pstate. However, this does not trigger for my system.
staticconstchar*profile_to_epp_pref(PpdProfileprofile){/* Note that we don't check "energy_performance_available_preferences" * as all the values are always available */switch(profile){casePPD_PROFILE_POWER_SAVER:return"power";casePPD_PROFILE_BALANCED:return"balance_performance";casePPD_PROFILE_PERFORMANCE:return"performance";}g_assert_not_reached();}
Ryan Bruechanged title from Power Saver profiles should set energy performance preference to balance_power or power to Power Saver profiles should set energy performance preference to balance_power or power{+ when using the amd-pstate-epp CPU scaling driver.+}
changed title from Power Saver profiles should set energy performance preference to balance_power or power to Power Saver profiles should set energy performance preference to balance_power or power{+ when using the amd-pstate-epp CPU scaling driver.+}
The issue is that if platform_profile is what PPD uses then the EPP is never set.
And if the pstate driver is used, then platform_profile is never used, meaning we have limited control and no fan-profile setting (or other related things happening in acpi). This applies to AMD and Intel.
These two things need to be used together if platform_profile is available. I'm looking at how to do this in kernel but it might be out of my ability.
It seems like this issue of multiple drivers applies to some lenovo devices as well, since the guy who was working on !123 (closed) was developing on a lenovo device. We'd probably want a solution to work for them as well