Watchguard XTM 5 Series
-
That's the point where it switches to the primary only console. Are you sure you used the serial memstick image? If you have used the standard VGA image that's exactly what you would see.
Steve
-
That's the point where it switches to the primary only console. Are you sure you used the serial memstick image? If you have used the standard VGA image that's exactly what you would see.
Steve
It is the memstick serial version i have used :/
-
Ah, interesting I never tried that.
I definitely did have it working at one time. Failed to keep better notes. :-[
Steve
[/quote]Well, this was a pretty steep learning curve but I can confirm that I now have a modified DSDT that fully supports SpeedStep on the stock CPU. And yes, I can confirm that SpeedStep does indeed work as intended.
I also fiddled quite a bit with C states, but the chipset really only supports C1 in a desktop configuration, so there is absolutely nothing to be gained in terms of idle power consumption: 46W at idle is it! Earlier today I had a Eureka moment thinking I can get lower idle power by enabling CPUSLP#, but as it turns out it is already enabled. Besides, I think the CPU actually drops into C1E state when idle so the power consumption gets as low as it possibly can already. But, of course, I could be talking out of my orifice since I really don't quite know enough about this.
My original issue with DSDT failing was Linux related: I was using a DSDT override method that is apparently no longer supported. Switching to Grub based override of DSDT fixed that issue. Next step for me will be to create and flash a custom BIOS image with the modified DSDT. I intend to create two versions: one for the stock CPU and one for my Q9505S CPU.
-
Well, this was a pretty steep learning curve but I can confirm that I now have a modified DSDT that fully supports SpeedStep on the stock CPU. And yes, I can confirm that SpeedStep does indeed work as intended.
I also fiddled quite a bit with C states, but the chipset really only supports C1 in a desktop configuration, so there is absolutely nothing to be gained in terms of idle power consumption: 46W at idle is it! Earlier today I had a Eureka moment thinking I can get lower idle power by enabling CPUSLP#, but as it turns out it is already enabled. Besides, I think the CPU actually drops into C1E state when idle so the power consumption gets as low as it possibly can already. But, of course, I could be talking out of my orifice since I really don't quite know enough about this.
My original issue with DSDT failing was Linux related: I was using a DSDT override method that is apparently no longer supported. Switching to Grub based override of DSDT fixed that issue. Next step for me will be to create and flash a custom BIOS image with the modified DSDT. I intend to create two versions: one for the stock CPU and one for my Q9505S CPU.
From what I remember using my old firebox, the stock power supply was very inefficient. It wasn't until I switched to a picoPSU and an efficient Toshiba laptop power brick that I saw the wattage drop from 45-50 watts to 25watts.
-
Yeah, it's probably not great at those Wattage levels despite being a smaller than stock PSU for the original Lanner device.
Steve
-
I now have a tested and working version of BIOS for the most recent XTM 5 Series hardware that shipped with E3400 CPU, that includes a number of tweaks and also implements SpeedStep for the E3400 CPU. If anyone is interested I can post a link to the BIOS image. Here is my full list of changes:
XTM515-BIOS1.3-UNLOCKED1.8: Changed 'Sign On Message' to include 'Unlocked v1.8 PT / E3400'. Corrected ACPI version help string line breaks in "Enabled RSDP pointers to 64-bit [...]". XTM515-BIOS1.3-UNLOCKED1.7: Changed 'Sign On Message' to include 'Unlocked v1.7 PT / E3400'. Modified LCD boot string from "WG BIOS 1.3" to "Firewall UTM" in module 1B (Single Link Arch BIOS). XTM515-BIOS1.3-UNLOCKED1.6: Changed 'Sign On Message' to include 'Unlocked v1.6 E3400 PT'. Created two ROM branches, one for E3400 CPU and one for Q9505S CPU. XTM515-BIOS1.3-UNLOCKED1.5: Changed 'Sign On Message' to include 'Unlocked v1.5 PT'. Enabled 'PCIPnP' and 'Chipset' menus. Enabled 'CPU Configuration' submenu in 'Advanced' menu. Enabled 'ACPI Configuration' submenu in 'Advanced' menu. XTM515-BIOS1.3-UNLOCKED1.4: Updated platform 11 CPUID 1067a microcode to version a0b. XTM515-BIOS1.3-UNLOCKED1.3: Disabled 'Lan ByPass Control' submenu in 'Advanced' menu. Modified BIOS Strings from 'Port0 AHCI Speed limit to' to 'Port0 AHCI Speed limit' for Port0 to Port3. XTM515-BIOS1.3-UNLOCKED1.2: Changed 'Aways CF Card Boot' to 'Show' in 'Advanced' menu. XTM515-BIOS1.3-UNLOCKED1.1: Unlocked the BIOS by changing 'User Access Level' to 03 in 'Security' menu. -
This post is deleted! -
Interesting so does this provide voltage/frequency steps for only the supported CPU? Or does it just try to apply those to whatever is installed?
I don't recall having to set a particular CPU type when I was messing about with this.
Steve
-
I am struggling to keep awake, so this will be a quick post in response to stephenw10 and 747Builder.
I spent q bit of time dissecting various BIOS flavours, including the XTM515. I reached a conclusion that it would be very difficult, if not impossible to implement a truly "universal" BIOS. This is primarily because most BIOS builds seem to include a baseline universal CPU ACPI information in the DSDT table, and then dynamically create the appropriate SSDT tables at boot. Those SSDT tables are created with code that resides in the "SLAB" module of the AMI BIOS - the Single Link Arch BIOS. The XTM515 BIOS is missing the required code so the easiest option is to create a separate BIOS image for each CPU model. This is effectively what I have done: the E3400 BIOS image has the required E3400 P-states programmed into the DSDT table, including the FID, VID, frequency and (estimated) power consumption. Similarly the Q9505S BIOS image has the required Q9505S P-states programmed into the DSDT table.
For each CPU model a new DSDT table has to be created and compiled, then merged into the baseline BIOS to replace the old DSDT table and to create a CPU specific BIOS image. I know that the Q9505S BIOS should work fine with Q9505, Q9505S, Q9550 and Q9550S CPUs, except the power will be way off for the non-S models. But the FID, VID and frequencies will be correct.
As an example, I am enclosing below a single CPU core DSDT excerpt for each of the above two CPUs. Please ignore the FID and VID numbers quoted in the comments as I have not fixed them yet to align with the actual FID and VID values in the code. This is left-over copy & paste-a-tis and my chronic lack of time!
CPU1 for E3400 with 4 P-states:
Processor (CPU1, 0x01, 0x00000810, 0x06) { Name (_PPC, 0x00) Name (_PCT, Package (0x02) { ResourceTemplate () { Register (FFixedHW, // PERF_CTL 0x10, // Bit Width 0x00, // Bit Offset 0x00000199, // Address ,) }, ResourceTemplate () { Register (FFixedHW, // PERF_STATUS 0x10, // Bit Width 0x00, // Bit Offset 0x00000198, // Address ,) } }) Name (_CST, Package (0x02) { 0x01, Package (0x04) { ResourceTemplate () { Register (FFixedHW, 0x01, // Bit Width 0x02, // Bit Offset 0x0000000000000000, // Address 0x01, // Access Size ) }, 1, // C State Type 2, // Transition latency in us 25000 // Power Consumption in mW } }) Name (_PSS, Package (0x04) // Values below for Intel Celeron E3400 { Package (0x06) { 2600, // f in MHz 65000, // P in mW 10, // Transition latency in us 10, // Bus Master latency in us 0x00000D24, // value written to PERF_CTL; fid=13, vid=36 0x00000D24 // value of PERF_STATE after successful transition; fid=13, vid=36 }, Package (0x06) { 2000, // f in MHz 53800, // P in mW 10, // Transition latency in us 10, // Bus Master latency in us 0x00000A1E, // value written to PERF_CTL; fid=13, vid=36 0x00000A1E // value of PERF_STATE after successful transition; fid=13, vid=36 }, Package (0x06) { 1600, // f in MHz 47500, // P in mW 10, // Transition latency in us 10, // Bus Master latency in us 0x0000081A, // value written to PERF_CTL; fid=13, vid=36 0x0000081A // value of PERF_STATE after successful transition; fid=13, vid=36 }, Package (0x06) { 1200, // f in MHz 42000, // P in mW 10, // Transition latency in us 10, // Bus Master latency in us 0x00000616, // value written to PERF_CTL; fid=13, vid=36 0x00000616 // value of PERF_STATE after successful transition; fid=13, vid=36 } }) }CPU1 for Q9505S with 6 P-states:
Processor (CPU1, 0x01, 0x00000810, 0x06) { Name (_PPC, 0x00) Name (_PCT, Package (0x02) { ResourceTemplate () { Register (FFixedHW, // PERF_CTL 0x10, // Bit Width 0x00, // Bit Offset 0x00000199, // Address ,) }, ResourceTemplate () { Register (FFixedHW, // PERF_STATUS 0x10, // Bit Width 0x00, // Bit Offset 0x00000198, // Address ,) } }) Name (_CST, Package (0x02) { 0x01, Package (0x04) { ResourceTemplate () { Register (FFixedHW, 0x01, // Bit Width 0x02, // Bit Offset 0x0000000000000000, // Address 0x01, // Access Size ) }, 1, // C State Type 2, // Transition latency in us 12000 // Power Consumption in mW } }) Name (_PSS, Package (0x06) // Values below for Intel Core 2 Quad Q9595S { Package (0x06) { 2833, // f in MHz 65000, // P in mW 10, // Transition latency in us 10, // Bus Master latency in us 0x0000481E, // value written to PERF_CTL; fid=48, vid=1E 0x0000481E // value of PERF_STATE after successful transition; fid=48, vid=1E }, Package (0x06) { 2666, // f in MHz 60100, // P in mW 10, // Transition latency in us 10, // Bus Master latency in us 0x0000081C, // value written to PERF_CTL; fid=9, vid=28 0x0000081C // value of PERF_STATE after successful transition; fid=9, vid=28 }, Package (0x06) { 2500, // f in MHz 56400, // P in mW 10, // Transition latency in us 10, // Bus Master latency in us 0x0000471B, // value written to PERF_CTL; fid=6, vid=22 0x0000471B // value of PERF_STATE after successful transition; fid=6, vid=22 }, Package (0x06) { 2333, // f in MHz 52000, // P in mW 10, // Transition latency in us 10, // Bus Master latency in us 0x00000719, // value written to PERF_CTL; fid=9, vid=28 0x00000719 // value of PERF_STATE after successful transition; fid=9, vid=28 }, Package (0x06) { 2166, // f in MHz 48600, // P in mW 10, // Transition latency in us 10, // Bus Master latency in us 0x00004618, // value written to PERF_CTL; fid=9, vid=28 0x00004618 // value of PERF_STATE after successful transition; fid=9, vid=28 }, Package (0x06) { 2000, // f in MHz 44700, // P in mW 10, // Transition latency in us 10, // Bus Master latency in us 0x00000616, // value written to PERF_CTL; fid=9, vid=28 0x00000616 // value of PERF_STATE after successful transition; fid=9, vid=28 } }) }So in summary, the two BIOS images I created should be only installed on XTM units equipped with the specific CPUs!
Peter.
-
Ah that looks very familiar. Though I recall having to add a line for each CPU core with the other cores effectively just linking to the first core for the data.
Hard to imagine why that code was not included by default really. Hmm.
Steve
-
Ah that looks very familiar. Though I recall having to add a line for each CPU core with the other cores effectively just linking to the first core for the data.
Hard to imagine why that code was not included by default really. Hmm.
Steve
I don't really get it either, especially considering that I imagine the AMIBIOS8 development kit would come with all the required code modules included. Perhaps it was an attempt at squeezing out the last bit of performance from the hardware? I have seen some claims that under some workloads SpeedStep can cause on the order of 20% performance hit, but I find that very hard to believe. My own primitive checks show anywhere from 0.5% to perhaps 2.5% potential hit, but a lot of it could be just the measurement accuracy.
I did a few additional checks on the E3400 box with my BIOS mods today and SpeedStep is definitely working correctly. I can see frequency and core voltages changing and all of it is reflected in benchmark testing…
Peter.
-
I tried modifying my BIOS for a Q9650 but don't think I was successful.. While it didn't break anything it didn't seem stop the "not supported" errors in the log at startup.. :(
My Ucode was a bit older..
-
Here is the link to my BIOS. Again, this is for the final hardware version of the XTM5 that came with the E3400 CPU. Included are three BIOS images: without SpeedStep (for all CPUs), E3400 CPU and Q9505S CPU. The Q9505S CPU should also work with Q9550S CPU. I also included the corresponding compiled ACPI_AML modules and the ACPI_AML source where you can inspect my changes.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/aom4whlcg2rg6ic/XTM515-BIOS.zip?dl=0
I will be tweaking the Q9505S a bit more since I now have good power measurements from my box in all six P-states under full load.
Disclaimer: These work fine for me but USE AT YOUR OWN RISK!
Peter.
-
This post is deleted! -
Nice you caught something I missed there! :)
acpi_dsdt_load="YES" acpi_dsdt_name="/conf/e3400.aml"dev.est.1.freq_settings: 2600/65000 2000/53800 1600/47500 1200/42000 dev.est.0.freq_settings: 2600/65000 2000/53800 1600/47500 1200/42000 dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 2600/65000 2000/53800 1600/47500 1200/42000 dev.cpu.0.freq: 1200Wrong values for my CPU but relatively easy fix!
Steve
Edit: Of course the 13x multiplier from the 3400 would be trying to drive an 8400 at 4.5GHz… which seems unlikely to succeed!
-
Does seem to actually work though:
[2.4.3-RELEASE][admin@xtm5.stevew.lan]/root: sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq=1200 dev.cpu.0.freq: 2600 -> 1200 [2.4.3-RELEASE][admin@xtm5.stevew.lan]/root: openssl speed -evp aes-128-cbc Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks: 26453752 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 64 size blocks: 7755366 aes-128-cbc's in 2.98s Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 256 size blocks: 2042954 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 1024 size blocks: 518803 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 8192 size blocks: 64976 aes-128-cbc's in 3.01s OpenSSL 1.0.2m-freebsd 2 Nov 2017 built on: date not available options:bn(64,64) rc4(16x,int) des(idx,cisc,16,int) aes(partial) idea(int) blowfish(idx) compiler: clang The 'numbers' are in 1000s of bytes per second processed. type 16 bytes 64 bytes 256 bytes 1024 bytes 8192 bytes aes-128-cbc 141086.68k 166314.03k 174332.07k 177084.76k 176966.95k [2.4.3-RELEASE][admin@xtm5.stevew.lan]/root: sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq=2600 dev.cpu.0.freq: 1200 -> 2600 [2.4.3-RELEASE][admin@xtm5.stevew.lan]/root: openssl speed -evp aes-128-cbc Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks: 39744717 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 64 size blocks: 11696373 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 256 size blocks: 3068062 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 1024 size blocks: 777909 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 8192 size blocks: 97684 aes-128-cbc's in 3.01s OpenSSL 1.0.2m-freebsd 2 Nov 2017 built on: date not available options:bn(64,64) rc4(16x,int) des(idx,cisc,16,int) aes(partial) idea(int) blowfish(idx) compiler: clang The 'numbers' are in 1000s of bytes per second processed. type 16 bytes 64 bytes 256 bytes 1024 bytes 8192 bytes aes-128-cbc 211971.82k 249522.62k 261807.96k 265526.27k 266049.61kActual result is 1.5x faster. I suggest that it is limited to a 9x multiplier on the 8400 so 6x at the "1200" setting and 9x at the "2600" setting. Actually 2GHz > 3GHz. Fun :)
Steve
-
Nice to hear! If you have a locked CPU then you are limited to what the minimum and maximum FID and VID values are for each given CPU. The Core Extreme CPUs as I understand are unlocked, so you could tweak the values freely.
I continued to tinker a bit. My latest changes implemented P-State dependencies _PSD, although that does not seem to make any obvious difference.
When I have a moment I will write down some quick notes 747Builder. Yes, I did update the microcode, but only for the CPUID that I am using. I don't see why one could not pick some other G41 based motherboard AMI BIOS that is recent and simply replace the whole CPU microcode module. Or you could do what I did and simply replace the microcode for the CPUID that you are using.
Peter.
-
Yes the max and min values for the E8400 (at least the one I have) are 9x and 6x so only 4 speeds. Unless it supports half speeds, I haven't tested.
Lot of warnings when you compile that. I think I went through it and fixed them last time around… too long ago! ::)
Steve
-
This post is deleted! -
Yes, seems to. But I've just seen a horrible typo! :-[
Edit: OK this looks better. Works OK here but YMMV. To be honest it doesn't do much from my testing. Maybe 1W less, at idle at least.
Steve
