For context, I use a Intel i7 laptop. I run 1 cube at a time at the most. Even when it’s charged at 100%, I’m only getting a maximum of 2 hours of battery life.
Is this normal? If not, how can I fix it?
ymy
June 5, 2023, 10:25pm
2
1 qube, that would be like dom0?
battery life is shorter than non virtualization, thats true.
you might can extent battery life with newer intel processors by using efficency cores for most of your tasking rather the performance cores. what generation is your processor?
You can try to add cpufreq=xen:hwp as Xen parameter to Grub to use HWP for frequency scaling::
opened 10:23PM - 12 Dec 18 UTC
T: bug
C: Xen
P: major
r4.1-buster-stable
hardware support
r4.1-bullseye-stable
r4.1-dom0-stable
needs diagnosis
pr submitted
r4.1-centos-stream8-cur-test
r4.1-bookworm-stable
r4.2-host-cur-test
### Qubes OS version:
<!-- (e.g., `R3.2`)
You can get it from the dom0 te… rminal with the command
`cat /etc/qubes-release`
Type below this line. -->
R4.0
### Affected component(s):
intel_pstate
acpi-cpufreq
xenpm
---
### Steps to reproduce the behavior:
<!-- Use single backticks (`) for in-line code snippets and
triple backticks (```) for code blocks.
Type below this line. -->
Tested on:
- Lenovo T480s
- Lenovo X1 Carbon Gen. 6
- Huawei Matebook X Pro.
All with Intel i7-8550U.
Latest BIOS revisions for the respective systems as of Dec. 2018
Kernel: 4.19.2-3.pvops.qubes.x86_64.
EFI install.
In dom0, `sudo xenpm get-cpufreq-para`
### Expected behavior:
The processor is rated at 1.8 GHz (4.0 turbo), so we would expect to see appropriate scaling in that range, available frequencies from 1800000 - 4000000.
Further, we would expect to see `scaling_driver = intel_pstate`.
### Actual behavior:
The CPU frequencies do not scale correctly. Why?
Frequencies are pinned at 2 GHz max, 400 MHz min, across all cores.
```
# xenpm cpu-freq-para
...
cpu id : 0
affected_cpus : 0
cpuinfo frequency : max [2001000] min [400000] cur [2001000]
scaling_driver : acpi-cpufreq
scaling_avail_gov : userspace performance powersave ondemand
current_governor : ondemand
ondemand specific :
sampling_rate : max [10000000] min [10000] cur [20000]
up_threshold : 80
scaling_avail_freq : 2001000 2000000 1900000 1800000 1700000 1500000 1400000 1300000 1200000 1100000 1000000 800000 700000 600000 500000 *400000
scaling frequency : max [2001000] min [400000] cur [400000]
turbo mode : enabled
...
```
Confirmed with `watch -n1 "cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep \"[c]pu MHz\""`
`xenpm set-scaling-maxfreq` and `-minfreq` have no effect.
`xenpm get-cpufreq-states` shows 16 total/usable P-states.
Changing the governor to `performance` has no effect. Default is `ondemand`
`dmidecode` reports a max of 2 GHz on the Lenovos, and an apparently erroneous speed on the Huawei (~ 8 GHz).
```
# dmidecode | grep -i speed
Speed: 2400 MT/s
Configured Clock Speed: 2400 MT/s
Speed: 2400 MT/s
Configured Clock Speed: 2400 MT/s
Speed: Unknown
Speed: Unknown
Speed: Unknown
Max Speed: 2000 MHz
Current Speed: 1800 MHz
```
The `scaling_driver` is legacy `acpi-cpufreq`. Interestingly, `intel_pstate` can be seen initializing during boot, but it does not take over handling anything. Attempting to `blacklist acpi-cpufreq` in `modprobe.d` has no effect.
```
# dmesg | grep pstate
[ 5.067624] intel_pstate: Intel P-state driver initializing
```
`/sys/devices/system/cpu/intel_pstate/` contains the expected attributes, but as mentioned in the "related issue" linked below, `no_turbo`, `num_pstates`, and `turbo_pct` error `Resource temporarily unavailable`.
`/sys/devices/system/cpu/intel_pstate/status` always returns `off`, and does not respond to `echo "active" >`. This behavior has been tested with various kernel command line parameters, including `intel_pstate=force`, `intel_pstate=disabled`, `intel_pstate=no_hwp`, `intel_pstate=enable` with no change in performance aside from `../cpu/intel_pstate/` attributes disappearing when `no_hwp` or `disabled` were in effect. Also tried `processor.ignore_ppc=1`.
Strangely, none of the appropriate attributes for `cpufreq` exist in `/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/`.
```
# ls /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/
acpi_cppc driver hotplug power topology
cache firmware_node node0 subsystem uevent
```
`lsmod | grep cpufreq` shows no results, trying to `modprobe acpi-cpufreq` or `cpufreq-xen` returns errors. `xen_acpi_processor` is loaded.
```
# modprobe acpi-cpufreq
modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'acpi_cpufreq': No such device
# modprobe cpufreq-xen
modprobe: FATAL: Module cpufreq-xen not found in directory /lib/modules/4.19.2-3.pvops.qubes.x86_64
```
`cpupower frequency-info` is completely unresponsive, with zero information available about the processor.
```
analyzing CPU 0:
no or unknown cpufreq driver is active on this CPU
CPUs which run at the same hardware frequency: Not Available
CPUs which need to have their frequency coordinated by software: Not Available
maximum transition latency: Cannot determine or is not supported.
Not Available
available cpufreq governors: Not Available
Unable to determine current policy
current CPU frequency: Unable to call hardware
current CPU frequency: Unable to call to kernel
boost state support:
Supported: yes
Active: yes
```
Though it shouldn't have any effect, testing was attempted with `smt=on` and `off`, and `Hyperthreading` enabled/disabled in the BIOS appropriately.
Testing was also performed while toggling various BIOS settings.
- enable/disable `Intel SpeedStep`
- power settings at `Maximum Performance` vs. `Balanced`
It does not appear to be a thermal throttling issue, with idle ~ 37*C and under load ~60*C observed consistently.
`tlp` was tested with no effect on the frequency scaling, regardless of being enabled or disabled. `tlp-stat` yields minimal additional info, with what seems to be an outdated recommendation for the Lenovos to install `tp-smapi kernel modules`, that are in fact deprecated in favor of `thinkpad_acpi`, which appears to be active on the Thinkpads.
```
dmesg | grep thinkpad
[ 19.589434] thinkpad_acpi: ThinkPad ACPI Extras v0.26
[ 19.589439] thinkpad_acpi: http://ibm-acpi.sf.net/
[ 19.589440] thinkpad_acpi: ThinkPad BIOS N22ET50W (1.27 ), EC unknown
[ 19.589441] thinkpad_acpi: Lenovo ThinkPad T480s, model 20L7CTO1WW
[ 19.591883] thinkpad_acpi: radio switch found; radios are enabled
[ 19.591898] thinkpad_acpi: This ThinkPad has standard ACPI backlight brightness control, supported by the ACPI video driver
[ 19.591899] thinkpad_acpi: Disabling thinkpad-acpi brightness events by default...
[ 19.612278] thinkpad_acpi: rfkill switch tpacpi_wwan_sw: radio is unblocked
[ 19.643468] thinkpad_acpi: Standard ACPI backlight interface available, not loading native one
[ 19.674512] thinkpad_acpi: battery 1 registered (start 0, stop 100)
[ 19.674576] input: ThinkPad Extra Buttons as /devices/platform/thinkpad_acpi/
```
`thermald` is not loaded.
### General notes:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.12/admin-guide/pm/intel_pstate.html
- This link suggests removing `irqbalance` but I'm skeptical.
https://askubuntu.com/questions/1067866/ubuntu-18-04-steam-games-frame-rate-drop/1073353#1073353?newreg=c7c120f373da4effb7317104571cd573
- https://cateee.net/lkddb/web-lkddb/XEN_ACPI_PROCESSOR.html
Regarding xen_acpi_processor: "It also registers itself as the SMM so that other drivers (such as ACPI cpufreq scaling driver) will not load."
How could `lsmod` report `xen_acpi_processor` as loaded but `xenpm` shows the scaling driver `acpi-cpufreq` ? This might make sense as to the missing `/sys/devices/.../cpufreq` entries.
- The following exchange is dubious at best, the final post gets down to the point of disabling intel microcode. They also suggest the use of `msr-tools`, but that really shouldn't be necessary.
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=231077
- This is good work, but in my opinion, running a script every few seconds in dom0 isn't a legitimate fix.
https://github.com/erpalma/lenovo-throttling-fix
---
### Related issues:
https://github.com/QubesOS/qubes-issues/issues/4491
https://github.com/QubesOS/qubes-issues/issues/450
The problem also may be because of dGPU consumption if your laptop has one. You may want to disable it.
1 Like
Could you explain further on what CPU frequency scaling failure mean?
I don’t have a dGpu
Just implemented what you said. It doesn’t work
How long is your battery life on a regular Linux distribution? One of the reasons is this:
If all your tasks require the GPU then your battery life will drastically decrease.
There’s a sensor viewer. You can see the power drain through the ACPI sensor. Normally it would be ~5 watt on idle, and can burst up to ~20 watt when under load. If you are seeing extremely high power drain, try to set power-saving mode in the BIOS and in xenpm.
The sensors can be read by running sensors as the root user in a dom0 terminal.
Syonyk
June 13, 2023, 9:25pm
10
Battery life on Qubes is “poor at best.” There’s no way around it, it’s just a somewhat inefficient way of handling computing.
You can add a Xen boot parameter that may improve things: sched_smt_power_savings
https://xenbits.xen.org/docs/unstable/misc/xen-command-line.html#sched_smt_power_savings
It won’t help a ton, but it will help some.
You may also look at the xen-pm command line options to disable turbo. That can help a lot.
Try lowering your monitor’s brightness, as the default setting
If I’m aware that basically running Qubes is like running multiple computers into one, then single battery couldn’t provide longevity of running “multiple computers”.
Also, if we interpret official statement that “Qubes OS is a free and open-source, security-oriented operating system for single-user desktop computing ”, then this could imply that if it’s about desktop, it’s not about mobility.
At the end, did anyone tested battery life running numerous virtual machines in VirtualBox under Windows as host? I’d bet, results would be way much worse than under Qubes.
solene
June 18, 2023, 4:34pm
13
I think this means Qubes OS is not for servers.
1 Like
Of course, that’s why I wrote it could imply in a broader context.
1 Like
ymy
June 20, 2023, 8:53pm
15
speaking of servers: someone© could go cookoo-banana and install proxmox on their laptop for a much closer comparising result between a usable xen bases enduser operating system and a server running a bunch of vms in KVM/QEMU - but is it really worth comparing? we know now this OS eats a lot of resources else it would be as compartmentalized as it should be.
