Scaling governor set to 'performance' on boot, rather than 'ondemand'

Go to System -> Administration -> Services. Is CPU Frequency Manager checked? I can create this bug by unchecking it on my system.

I'm having the same problem. The aforementioned setting is checked for me, but I don't see powernowd in the process list, and the governor is set to Performance by default.

On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 12:06:42AM -0000, TheBigT wrote:
> I'm having the same problem. The aforementioned setting is checked for
> me, but I don't see powernowd in the process list, and the governor is
> set to Performance by default.

Powernowd is not expected to be in the process list. For historical
reasons, the scaling governor is set by the powernowd package, even though
the daemon itself isn't actually needed.

--
 - mdz

@smmalis37: the relevant init scripts are enabled per default on my system:

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 2005-02-25 20:57 /etc/rc1.d/K20powernowd -> ../init.d/powernowd
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 25 2006-02-24 21:45 /etc/rc2.d/S10powernowd.early -> ../init.d/powernowd.early
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 2005-02-25 20:57 /etc/rc3.d/S20powernowd -> ../init.d/powernowd
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 2005-02-25 20:57 /etc/rc4.d/S20powernowd -> ../init.d/powernowd
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 2005-02-25 20:57 /etc/rc5.d/S20powernowd -> ../init.d/powernowd

Er, reading what I pasted now...I see that the rc2.d/S20powernowd link is missing, i.e. it is not running in runlevel 2. This one is an older system which has been upgraded many times.

The links are correct on another system which was installed from an Intrepid alpha:

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 2008-07-24 23:56 /etc/rc1.d/K20powernowd -> ../init.d/powernowd
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 25 2008-07-24 23:56 /etc/rc2.d/S10powernowd.early -> ../init.d/powernowd.early
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 2008-07-24 23:56 /etc/rc2.d/S20powernowd -> ../init.d/powernowd
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 2008-07-24 23:56 /etc/rc3.d/S20powernowd -> ../init.d/powernowd
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 2008-07-24 23:56 /etc/rc4.d/S20powernowd -> ../init.d/powernowd
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 2008-07-24 23:56 /etc/rc5.d/S20powernowd -> ../init.d/powernowd

@TheBigT: can you check whether you have /etc/rc2.d/S20powernowd?

I've never messed about with system/administration/services, so either I removed it manually or it disappeared during an upgrade.

(to ubuntu-devel)

I discovered on one of my systems (upgraded since forever) that
/etc/rc2.d/S20powernowd was missing, resulting in the cpufreq scaling
governor failing to be set to ondemand by default:

https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/intrepid/+source/powernowd/+bug/262567

I don't remember doing this manually, and at least one other person has
reported this symlink missing.

I would appreciate if folks could check their systems to see if this symlink
is missing, to see whether there is a larger problem here.

--
 - mdz

/etc/rc2.d/S20powernowd simlink present on fresh+updates Intrepid Alpha6
& Beta1 installs, and on fresh+updates Hardy and Gutsy installs (no
upgrades).

I installed Intrepid Beta + updates from scratch yesterday and the simlink is there.

Gutsy => Hardy => Intrepid upgraded Intel Core Duo laptop: symlink present.
Hardy => Intrepid upgraded AMD Opteron PC: symlink present.

Hi Matt:

I've seen things like this happening on a variety of packages that I've
ended up touching to fix it. In each of the cases, I've had to go and
explicitly define the runlevels in debian/rules w/ dh_installinit.

Packages I've seen so far that it happened to:

   - mythbackend
   - bluetooth
   - dkms

My immediate guess would be either the parser of the header in the init
script isn't friendly anymore, or there is a typo in each of these.

Regards

On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 06:23, Matt Zimmerman <email address hidden> wrote:

> (to ubuntu-devel)
>
> I discovered on one of my systems (upgraded since forever) that
> /etc/rc2.d/S20powernowd was missing, resulting in the cpufreq scaling
> governor failing to be set to ondemand by default:
>
>
> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/intrepid/+source/powernowd/+bug/262567
>
> I don't remember doing this manually, and at least one other person has
> reported this symlink missing.
>
> I would appreciate if folks could check their systems to see if this
> symlink
> is missing, to see whether there is a larger problem here.
>
> --
> - mdz
>
> --
> ubuntu-devel mailing list
> <email address hidden>
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
>

--
Mario Limonciello
<email address hidden>

My system has been also dist-upgraded since always, and the symlink is present (dated 2008-06-08 14:18).

/etc/rc2.d$ ls -la | grep powernow
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 2008-09-03 21:48 S20powernowd -> ../init.d/powernowd
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 25 2008-09-03 21:51 S20powernowd.early -> ../init.d/powernowd.early

They are present and accounted for. My system was originally 8.04 then upgraded to Alpha-5 and then to Beta.

Harvey Muller provided this data point: "It is pre-Hardy. I've been doing full installs instead of upgrades, since Feisty. I can at least confirm that a full install of Hardy (upgraded fully) does not have this issue."

On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 03:28:58PM -0000, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> I've seen things like this happening on a variety of packages that I've
> ended up touching to fix it. In each of the cases, I've had to go and
> explicitly define the runlevels in debian/rules w/ dh_installinit.
>
> Packages I've seen so far that it happened to:
>
> - mythbackend
> - bluetooth
> - dkms
>
> My immediate guess would be either the parser of the header in the init
> script isn't friendly anymore, or there is a typo in each of these.

As far as I'm aware, most packages don't actually use the LSB info in the
scripts, and the hardcoded defaults in the maintainer scripts are
authoritative.

Can you describe the problems that you've seen and how you fixed them?
Maybe there's something else going on here.

--
 - mdz

@TheBigT: I suspect you and I may have different problems. Does "sudo /etc/init.d/powernowd start" set the governor to ondemand for you?

Olá Matt e a todos.

On Sunday 12 October 2008 12:23:45 Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> I would appreciate if folks could check their systems to see if this symlink
> is missing, to see whether there is a larger problem here.

Mine has it:
$ ls /etc/rc2.d/S20powernowd
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 2008-05-09 16:32 /etc/rc2.d/S20powernowd -> ../init.d/powernowd*

Hardy 8.04 upgrade to intrepid alpha1

--
BUGabundo :o)
(``-_-´´) http://LinuxNoDEI.BUGabundo.net
Linux user #443786 GPG key 1024D/A1784EBB
My new micro-blog @ http://BUGabundo.net

On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 03:43, Matt Zimmerman <email address hidden> wrote:

> As far as I'm aware, most packages don't actually use the LSB info in the
> scripts, and the hardcoded defaults in the maintainer scripts are
> authoritative.
>
> Can you describe the problems that you've seen and how you fixed them?
> Maybe there's something else going on here.
>
> The problem I saw was that people suddenly didn't have the init script
starting. I fixed them in each of the cases by explicitly modifying
debian/rules to either call dh_installinit with the appropriate parameters
or setting the CDBS variable with the same effect (depending on the
packaging).

--
Mario Limonciello
<email address hidden>

On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 01:24:29PM -0000, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 03:43, Matt Zimmerman <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> > As far as I'm aware, most packages don't actually use the LSB info in the
> > scripts, and the hardcoded defaults in the maintainer scripts are
> > authoritative.
> >
> > Can you describe the problems that you've seen and how you fixed them?
> > Maybe there's something else going on here.
> >
> The problem I saw was that people suddenly didn't have the init script
> starting. I fixed them in each of the cases by explicitly modifying
> debian/rules to either call dh_installinit with the appropriate parameters
> or setting the CDBS variable with the same effect (depending on the
> packaging).

I wouldn't expect the init script to work at all without an appropriate
dh_installinit call in debian/rules (or the corresponding code manually
added to debian/rules and the maintainer scripts).

--
 - mdz

> @TheBigT: I suspect you and I may have different problems. Does "sudo /etc/init.d/powernowd start"
> set the governor to ondemand for you?

Yes, it does.

That's very strange. I'm willing to chalk up my own problem to having removed the symlink at some point, since no one else has confirmed it. I've restored the symlink and fully expect it to work now.

Perhaps you could add "set -x; exec 2>>/var/log/powernowd-init.log" to the top of /etc/init.d/powernowd and see what turns up in the log?

Since this hasn't been independently confirmed, I'm closing it out. To the reporter of 281914: if you believe your problem is different, please un-dupe the bug.

/etc/rc2.d/S20powernowd is missing on my computer. I installed a beta 4 version (I think) and then always upgraded with apt-get or aptitude.

Hum, powernowd is not even installed on my system.

Maybe a dependance problem.

Ups, wrong bug. I am currently running Jaunty...
Sorry for the noise.