Please select To the mobile version | Continue to access the desktop computer version

OrangePi

 Login            
 Register            
Search
Hot search: orangepi
Author: rajib

Ubuntu 15.04 (Loboris) - Unable to install kodi

[Copy link]

0

Threads

32

Posts

285

Credits

Intermediate member

Rank: 3Rank: 3

Credits
285
Post time 2015-11-18 18:16:56 | Show all posts
It seems that I solved the problem!
I limited CPU freq to 1200 and DDR freq to 600 and experienced no crashes so far
Post time 2015-11-18 21:57:35 | Show all posts
whitewind replied at 2015-11-18 18:16
I limited CPU freq to 1200 and DDR freq to 600 and experienced no crashes so far


As expected. It's still the simple rule "Cheap, fast, reliable -- choose two".

Would be interesting to compare your still 'overclocked' settings with sane settings. Would you mind running the 3 short benchmarks listed here with your current settings and with sane settings (1200 or better 1008 MHz cpufreq and DRAM @ 480 MHz) to compare results?

0

Threads

32

Posts

285

Credits

Intermediate member

Rank: 3Rank: 3

Credits
285
Post time 2015-11-19 10:32:31 | Show all posts
bronco replied at 2015-11-18 21:57
As expected. It's still the simple rule "Cheap, fast, reliable -- choose two".

Would be intere ...
  1. cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_max_freq
  2. 1200000
  3. cat /sys/devices/platform/sunxi-ddrfreq/devfreq/sunxi-ddrfreq/cur_freq
  4. 600000
Copy the Code
  1. sysbench --test=cpu --cpu-max-prime=20000 run --num-threads=4 && echo -e "\n\n" && 7za b && echo -e "\n\n" && mbw -t0 200 ; mbw -t1 200 ; mbw -t2 200   
  2. sysbench 0.4.12:  multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark

  3. Test execution summary:
  4.     total time:                          154.4941s
  5.     total number of events:              10000
  6.     total time taken by event execution: 617.8966
  7.     per-request statistics:
  8.          min:                                 61.10ms
  9.          avg:                                 61.79ms
  10.          max:                                138.14ms
  11.          approx.  95 percentile:              66.28ms

  12. Threads fairness:
  13.     events (avg/stddev):           2500.0000/40.42
  14.     execution time (avg/stddev):   154.4741/0.02

  15. 7-Zip (A) 9.20  Copyright (c) 1999-2010 Igor Pavlov  2010-11-18
  16. p7zip Version 9.20 (locale=en_US.UTF-8,Utf16=on,HugeFiles=on,4 CPUs)

  17. RAM size:    1002 MB,  # CPU hardware threads:   4
  18. RAM usage:    850 MB,  # Benchmark threads:      4

  19. Dict        Compressing          |        Decompressing
  20.       Speed Usage    R/U Rating  |    Speed Usage    R/U Rating
  21.        KB/s     %   MIPS   MIPS  |     KB/s     %   MIPS   MIPS

  22. 22:    1310   295    432   1275  |    27377   303    814   2470
  23. 23:    1236   280    449   1259  |    34295   385    815   3138
  24. 24:    1209   315    413   1300  |    33697   388    806   3126
  25. 25:    1159   340    389   1324  |    33095   387    804   3112
  26. ----------------------------------------------------------------
  27. Avr:          307    421   1290               366    810   2961
  28. Tot:          336    615   2125

  29. Long uses 4 bytes. Allocating 2*52428800 elements = 419430400 bytes of memory.
  30. Getting down to business... Doing 10 runs per test.
  31. 0       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 1.44191        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 138.705 MiB/s
  32. 1       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.48774        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 410.058 MiB/s
  33. 2       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.48344        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 413.704 MiB/s
  34. 3       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.48413        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 413.110 MiB/s
  35. 4       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.48390        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 413.306 MiB/s
  36. 5       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.48377        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 413.423 MiB/s
  37. 6       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.48406        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 413.174 MiB/s
  38. 7       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.48439        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 412.895 MiB/s
  39. 8       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.48377        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 413.423 MiB/s
  40. 9       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.48416        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 413.088 MiB/s
  41. AVG     Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.58013        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 344.753 MiB/s
  42. Long uses 4 bytes. Allocating 2*52428800 elements = 419430400 bytes of memory.
  43. Getting down to business... Doing 10 runs per test.
  44. 0       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 1.56488        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 127.805 MiB/s
  45. 1       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.28296        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 706.809 MiB/s
  46. 2       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.26870        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 744.338 MiB/s
  47. 3       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.26941        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 742.352 MiB/s
  48. 4       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.26937        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 742.476 MiB/s
  49. 5       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.26952        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 742.049 MiB/s
  50. 6       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.26910        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 743.218 MiB/s
  51. 7       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.26919        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 742.970 MiB/s
  52. 8       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.26969        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 741.603 MiB/s
  53. 9       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.26973        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 741.479 MiB/s
  54. AVG     Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.40026        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 499.681 MiB/s
  55. Long uses 4 bytes. Allocating 2*52428800 elements = 419430400 bytes of memory.
  56. Using 262144 bytes as blocks for memcpy block copy test.
  57. Getting down to business... Doing 10 runs per test.
  58. 0       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.57257        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 349.299 MiB/s
  59. 1       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.29024        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 689.073 MiB/s
  60. 2       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.29657        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 674.388 MiB/s
  61. 3       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.29116        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 686.912 MiB/s
  62. 4       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.28948        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 690.882 MiB/s
  63. 5       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.29001        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 689.631 MiB/s
  64. 6       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.28972        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 690.329 MiB/s
  65. 7       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.28939        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 691.102 MiB/s
  66. 8       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.28941        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 691.056 MiB/s
  67. 9       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.28953        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 690.782 MiB/s
  68. AVG     Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.31881        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 627.335 MiB/s
Copy the Code
  1. cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_max_freq
  2. 1008000
  3. cat /sys/devices/platform/sunxi-ddrfreq/devfreq/sunxi-ddrfreq/cur_freq
  4. 480000
Copy the Code
  1. Test execution summary:
  2.     total time:                          184.6397s
  3.     total number of events:              10000
  4.     total time taken by event execution: 738.4045
  5.     per-request statistics:
  6.          min:                                 72.76ms
  7.          avg:                                 73.84ms
  8.          max:                                184.96ms
  9.          approx.  95 percentile:              78.61ms

  10. Threads fairness:
  11.     events (avg/stddev):           2500.0000/31.95
  12.     execution time (avg/stddev):   184.6011/0.02

  13. 7-Zip (A) 9.20  Copyright (c) 1999-2010 Igor Pavlov  2010-11-18
  14. p7zip Version 9.20 (locale=en_US.UTF-8,Utf16=on,HugeFiles=on,4 CPUs)

  15. RAM size:    1002 MB,  # CPU hardware threads:   4
  16. RAM usage:    850 MB,  # Benchmark threads:      4

  17. Dict        Compressing          |        Decompressing
  18.       Speed Usage    R/U Rating  |    Speed Usage    R/U Rating
  19.        KB/s     %   MIPS   MIPS  |     KB/s     %   MIPS   MIPS

  20. 22:     883   284    302    859  |    28271   383    666   2550
  21. 23:    1024   304    342   1043  |    28215   384    672   2582
  22. 24:     967   328    316   1040  |    28018   386    674   2599
  23. 25:     961   346    316   1097  |    27530   386    670   2589
  24. ----------------------------------------------------------------
  25. Avr:          316    319   1010               385    670   2580
  26. Tot:          350    495   1795

  27. Long uses 4 bytes. Allocating 2*52428800 elements = 419430400 bytes of memory.
  28. Getting down to business... Doing 10 runs per test.
  29. 0       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 1.95616        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 102.241 MiB/s
  30. 1       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.66871        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 299.082 MiB/s
  31. 2       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.61808        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 323.584 MiB/s
  32. 3       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.61786        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 323.698 MiB/s
  33. 4       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.61683        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 324.237 MiB/s
  34. 5       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.61812        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 323.563 MiB/s
  35. 6       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.61738        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 323.951 MiB/s
  36. 7       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.61769        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 323.785 MiB/s
  37. 8       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.61762        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 323.825 MiB/s
  38. 9       Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.61686        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 324.222 MiB/s
  39. AVG     Method: MEMCPY  Elapsed: 0.75653        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 264.364 MiB/s
  40. Long uses 4 bytes. Allocating 2*52428800 elements = 419430400 bytes of memory.
  41. Getting down to business... Doing 10 runs per test.
  42. 0       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 1.79266        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 111.566 MiB/s
  43. 1       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.33156        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 603.215 MiB/s
  44. 2       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.34014        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 588.002 MiB/s
  45. 3       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.34048        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 587.413 MiB/s
  46. 4       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.33511        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 596.810 MiB/s
  47. 5       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.34012        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 588.031 MiB/s
  48. 6       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.34004        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 588.159 MiB/s
  49. 7       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.33948        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 589.136 MiB/s
  50. 8       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.33083        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 604.535 MiB/s
  51. 9       Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.33151        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 603.296 MiB/s
  52. AVG     Method: DUMB    Elapsed: 0.48219        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 414.771 MiB/s
  53. Long uses 4 bytes. Allocating 2*52428800 elements = 419430400 bytes of memory.
  54. Using 262144 bytes as blocks for memcpy block copy test.
  55. Getting down to business... Doing 10 runs per test.
  56. 0       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.69250        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 288.808 MiB/s
  57. 1       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.42269        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 473.160 MiB/s
  58. 2       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.40659        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 491.901 MiB/s
  59. 3       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.40983        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 488.008 MiB/s
  60. 4       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.41297        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 484.292 MiB/s
  61. 5       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.40258        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 496.799 MiB/s
  62. 6       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.39701        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 503.762 MiB/s
  63. 7       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.41403        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 483.054 MiB/s
  64. 8       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.39970        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 500.379 MiB/s
  65. 9       Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.39838        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 502.029 MiB/s
  66. AVG     Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.43563        MiB: 200.00000  Copy: 459.107 MiB/s
Copy the Code

Post time 2015-11-19 22:48:48 | Show all posts

Would you mind giving cpufreq-ljt-stress-test a try as outlined here: http://linux-sunxi.org/Hardware_Reliability_Tests#CPU

0

Threads

32

Posts

285

Credits

Intermediate member

Rank: 3Rank: 3

Credits
285
Post time 2015-11-20 17:53:06 | Show all posts
bronco replied at 2015-11-19 22:48
Would you mind giving cpufreq-ljt-stress-test a try as outlined here: http://linux-sunxi.org/Hardw ...
  1. Testing CPU 0
  2. 1536 MHz SKIPPED
  3. 1440 MHz SKIPPED
  4. 1344 MHz SKIPPED
  5. 1200 MHz ............................................................ OK
  6. 1104 MHz ............................................................ OK
  7. 1008 MHz ............................................................ OK
  8.   912 MHz ............................................................ OK
  9.   816 MHz ............................................................ OK
  10.   720 MHz ............................................................ OK
  11.   648 MHz ............................................................ OK
  12.   600 MHz ............................................................ OK
  13.   504 MHz ............................................................ OK
  14.   480 MHz ............................................................ OK
  15.   408 MHz SKIPPED
  16.   312 MHz SKIPPED
  17.   240 MHz SKIPPED
  18.   120 MHz SKIPPED
  19.    60 MHz SKIPPED
Copy the Code
All cores produce the same result. No failures as expected: I use heatsink with fan

Post time 2015-11-20 18:35:16 | Show all posts
whitewind replied at 2015-11-20 17:53
All cores produce the same result. No failures as expected: I use heatsink with fan

Sorry, I don't understand... what do you mean with "all cores produce the same result"?

A realistic approach to check both stability and data integrity on a multi core system with n cores is to run n-1 cpuburn-a7 tasks while executing 1 cpufreq-ljt-stress-test and see what's happening then.

Same applies to lima-memtester.

The so called 'default' clockspeeds used with the H3 based Orange Pis are so insanely high that I would simply call them overclocked. But where's the point when you run your system even when idle at voltage/clockspeed combinations that would only be useful if you plan to do high performance computing. And then not trying out how the hardware behaves in such HPC situations when utilising all cores with 100%.

If HPC is NOT the goal then it would make much more sense to use conservative settings (adjusting clockspeeds in sysfs is not enough, it would also require more operating point's inside the fex file's dvfs table) since the need for a fan or even a heatsink might be gone. And if HPC is the goal then a reliability test with HPC conditions has to proof that the settings are sane for such situations (but I still doubt that an ultra-slow Cortex-A7 design is the right foundation for HPC but since the problem also applies to other situations like gaming it's still necessary to test what's happening when running with full utilisation)

Anyway: In a few weeks my Orange Pi PC will arrive and I will then give it a try with something like this http://pastebin.com/Wa879G0Y and report back the other thread.

0

Threads

32

Posts

285

Credits

Intermediate member

Rank: 3Rank: 3

Credits
285
Post time 2015-11-20 20:44:44 | Show all posts
bronco replied at 2015-11-20 18:35
Sorry, I don't understand... what do you mean with "all cores produce the same result"?

A realist ...

cpuburn-a7 starts 4 threads and doesn't have an option.
Anyway, I when I run cpuburn-a7 and cpufreq-ljt-stress-test in parallel, I have no errors and max temp is 56°
Post time 2015-11-20 20:55:31 | Show all posts
Edited by bronco at 2015-11-20 21:00
whitewind replied at 2015-11-20 20:44
when I run cpuburn-a7 and cpufreq-ljt-stress-test in parallel, I have no errors and max temp is 56°

Ok, when lima-memtester also exits without an error while cpuburn-a7 is running simultaneously your cooling approach seems to be safe regarding data integrity and stability. Problems with decreased lifespan may remain due to high voltage settings but maybe that's not of interest to Orange Pi H3 users...
Anyway, thx for the tests. I will wait until my Orange Pi PC arrives and then do some own testings and report back here. And good news: Siarhei in the meantime received his first H3 device and that might improve hardware specific issues also a lot (he's the one who wrote the tools you used)


10

Threads

448

Posts

3879

Credits

Moderator

Rank: 7Rank: 7Rank: 7

Credits
3879
Post time 2015-11-20 21:40:20 | Show all posts
Edited by loboris at 2015-11-20 15:07

cpufreq-ljt-stress-test (script modified to show cpu temperature and skip tests for 504 to 912 MHz)
OparngePi-2, heatsink&fan(3x3cm,5V), Ubuntu 14.04, kernel
3.4.39-01-lobo, ambient temperature 24 C

@bronco  I dont think there will be any "decreased lifespan" when running at 1200/1536 MHZ, H3 SoC is capable of running at 80 C continuously.

***

CPU stress test, which is doing JPEG decoding by libjpeg-turbo
at different cpufreq operating points.

Testing CPU 0
1536 MHz ............................................................ T=66 OK
1440 MHz ............................................................ T=65 OK
1344 MHz ............................................................ T=63 OK
1200 MHz ............................................................ T=49 OK
1104 MHz ............................................................ T=47 OK
1008 MHz ............................................................ T=46 OK
  912 MHz SKIPPED
  816 MHz SKIPPED
  720 MHz SKIPPED
  648 MHz SKIPPED
  600 MHz SKIPPED
  504 MHz SKIPPED
  480 MHz ............................................................ T=37 OK
  408 MHz SKIPPED
  312 MHz SKIPPED
  240 MHz SKIPPED
  120 MHz SKIPPED
   60 MHz SKIPPED

Testing CPU 1
1536 MHz ............................................................ T=65 OK
1440 MHz ............................................................ T=64 OK
1344 MHz ............................................................ T=63 OK
1200 MHz ............................................................ T=48 OK
1104 MHz ............................................................ T=47 OK
1008 MHz ............................................................ T=46 OK
  912 MHz SKIPPED
  816 MHz SKIPPED
  720 MHz SKIPPED
  648 MHz SKIPPED
  600 MHz SKIPPED
  504 MHz SKIPPED
  480 MHz ............................................................ T=37 OK
  408 MHz SKIPPED
  312 MHz SKIPPED
  240 MHz SKIPPED
  120 MHz SKIPPED
   60 MHz SKIPPED

Testing CPU 2
1536 MHz ............................................................ T=65 OK
1440 MHz ............................................................ T=64 OK
1344 MHz ............................................................ T=63 OK
1200 MHz ............................................................ T=48 OK
1104 MHz ............................................................ T=47 OK
1008 MHz ............................................................ T=46 OK
  912 MHz SKIPPED
  816 MHz SKIPPED
  720 MHz SKIPPED
  648 MHz SKIPPED
  600 MHz SKIPPED
  504 MHz SKIPPED
  480 MHz ............................................................ T=37 OK
  408 MHz SKIPPED
  312 MHz SKIPPED
  240 MHz SKIPPED
  120 MHz SKIPPED
   60 MHz SKIPPED

Testing CPU 3
1536 MHz ............................................................ T=65 OK
1440 MHz ............................................................ T=64 OK
1344 MHz ............................................................ T=63 OK
1200 MHz ............................................................ T=49 OK
1104 MHz ............................................................ T=47 OK
1008 MHz ............................................................ T=46 OK
  912 MHz SKIPPED
  816 MHz SKIPPED
  720 MHz SKIPPED
  648 MHz SKIPPED
  600 MHz SKIPPED
  504 MHz SKIPPED
  480 MHz ............................................................ T=37 OK
  408 MHz SKIPPED
  312 MHz SKIPPED
  240 MHz SKIPPED
  120 MHz SKIPPED
   60 MHz SKIPPED

Overall result : PASSED

Without fan
(when 1536 test runs successfully, it means that it actually run at 1200 MHz,
because of termal throttling the frequeny is imediately after start lowered to 1200 MHz
[ 9674.230309] CPU Budget:update CPU 0 cpufreq max to 1200000 min to 480000
[ 9675.770205] CPU Budget: Temperature: 77 Limit state:0 item[1536000,4,-1,0 0]

)


CPU stress test, which is doing JPEG decoding by libjpeg-turbo
at different cpufreq operating points.

Testing CPU 0
1536 MHz ............................................................ T=74 OK
1440 MHz SKIPPED
1344 MHz SKIPPED
1200 MHz ............................................................ T=73 OK
1104 MHz ............................................................ T=73 OK
1008 MHz ............................................................ T=73 OK
  912 MHz SKIPPED
  816 MHz SKIPPED
  720 MHz SKIPPED
  648 MHz SKIPPED
  600 MHz SKIPPED
  504 MHz SKIPPED
  480 MHz ............................................................ T=62 OK
  408 MHz SKIPPED
  312 MHz SKIPPED
  240 MHz SKIPPED
  120 MHz SKIPPED
   60 MHz SKIPPED

Testing CPU 1
1536 MHz ............................................................ T=76 OK
1440 MHz SKIPPED
1344 MHz SKIPPED
1200 MHz ............................................................ T=78 OK
1104 MHz ............................................................ T=77 OK
1008 MHz ............................................................ T=77 OK
  912 MHz SKIPPED
  816 MHz SKIPPED
  720 MHz SKIPPED
  648 MHz SKIPPED
  600 MHz SKIPPED
  504 MHz SKIPPED
  480 MHz ............................................................ T=65 OK
  408 MHz SKIPPED
  312 MHz SKIPPED
  240 MHz SKIPPED
  120 MHz SKIPPED
   60 MHz SKIPPED

Testing CPU 2
1536 MHz . T=77 FAILED
1440 MHz SKIPPED
1344 MHz SKIPPED
1200 MHz ............................................................ T=78 OK
1104 MHz ............................................................ T=78 OK
1008 MHz ............................................................ T=77 OK
  912 MHz SKIPPED
  816 MHz SKIPPED
  720 MHz SKIPPED
  648 MHz SKIPPED
  600 MHz SKIPPED
  504 MHz SKIPPED
  480 MHz ............................................................ T=65 OK
  408 MHz SKIPPED
  312 MHz SKIPPED
  240 MHz SKIPPED
  120 MHz SKIPPED
   60 MHz SKIPPED

Testing CPU 3
1536 MHz ............................................................ T=79 OK
1440 MHz SKIPPED
1344 MHz SKIPPED
1200 MHz ............................................................ T=80 OK
1104 MHz ............................................................ T=79 OK
1008 MHz ............................................................ T=78 OK
  912 MHz SKIPPED
  816 MHz SKIPPED
  720 MHz SKIPPED
  648 MHz SKIPPED
  600 MHz SKIPPED
  504 MHz SKIPPED
  480 MHz ............................................................ T=65 OK
  408 MHz SKIPPED
  312 MHz SKIPPED
  240 MHz SKIPPED
  120 MHz SKIPPED
   60 MHz SKIPPED

Overall result : FAILED



Click on image to show full size

This post contains more resources

You have to Login for download or view attachment(s). No Account? Register

x
Post time 2015-11-20 22:23:42 | Show all posts
loboris replied at 2015-11-20 21:40
cpufreq-ljt-stress-test (script modified to show cpu temperature and skip tests for 504 to 912 MHz)
...

Wow! Great comprehensive reply. Thank you a lot.

Very good idea to show the temperature as well. Might be an idea to add /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/cpuinfo_cur_freq also to the output and publish the modified script somewhere?

Regarding temperatures: based on my (very limited electrical) knowledge it makes a huge difference if a SoC stays at sane temperatures on its own or whether you need advanced heat dissipation techniques (AKA heatsink + fan) to achieve these temperatures. You increase the core voltage a bit and temperatures rise almost exponentially. Based on discussions on the linux-sunxi list it seems to be common knowledge that slight increases in core voltage negatively affect the chip's achievable lifespan.

The fex files from you I looked into just define 2 dvfs table entries with rather high voltages. I would suspect that many of the heat problems disappear automagically if one uses more entries with lower voltages for lower clockspeeds (I will start with these entries when my board arrives in a few weeks, but can not recommend to test these by anyone else who's not experienced with modifying fex files). I'll report back with some insights then.
At the moment I'm happy that the heat problems seem to be solveable by adjusting dvfs stuff and clockspeeds. And that's all I need to evaluate the H3 for home automation and IoT stuff.

In my eyes the H3 only has two interesting features: H.265 capable (Android only) and cheap as hell (no PMU, integrated 100 MBit Ethernet PHY). Since I'm not interested in Android only the latter applies...
You have to log in before you can reply Login | Register

Points Rules

Archiver|Mobile edition|Darkroom|OrangePi En ( 粤ICP备14086627号-2

2019-11-22 10:20 GMT+8 , Processed in 0.040948 second(s), 20 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.2

© 2014-2015 orangepibbs en.

Quick Reply To Top Return to the list