Disabling core parking

[BenYeeHua]

I think it need more space at bottom of the sliders.
Because different font size will pushing sliders down.

[Jeremy Collake]

Ok, thanks for letting me know, I will add it! Just put it on today's TODO list ...

[Jeremy Collake]

Adjustment made. I will upload a new build soon. It should provide enough additional bottom space, but if not, let me know.

[BenYeeHua]

En....
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Windows-Software-122001/Tests/Windows-8-Test-1018303/
It show that, in windows 8, the gaming performance is decreased, maybe another core-parking issue?
Because the BF3 and Shogun 2: Total War is increased, but the lightweight game is decreased.
I need the time!!!!
And the internet QoS(you know that....) to find some person to test it...
----
BTW, I think is because the windows 8 is aim at the tablet etc, so it has tweaking the core-parking more aggressive, to saving the energy on the mobile(all mobile, the ultrabook also) 

[Jeremy Collake]

Hmm... That doesn't jive with the overall Windows 8 experience, and the fact that gaming performance should be near identical, if not better. When I get time I will dig into the reports in depth. Right now I have days left to get a pretty major new version out.

[edkiefer]

I have been following this feature but is there a list of cpu that support parking with latest OS .

On Intel side is it only ones with HT ?

I have 3570k (4 core , no HT 3.4/3.8ghz)  and even with stock power option of balanced no of cores were parked  (I tested in resource meter ) . I personally don't want it on but just wondering what factors there are . seems power profile has affect along with bios if you disable it .

[Jeremy Collake]

The pre-requisites are at least 2 logical processors and Windows NT 6.0 or above. The supported CPUs vary substantially. Processors as recent as the Phenom II (AMD's famous x6 processor that *still* holds its own since it has 6 truly independent cores) don't support core parking. It is something that can also be toggled in the BIOS on many systems. If your PC supports it, the one thing you can be sure of is that you will see it in the Resource Monitor. No need to try to make your PC idle, it will park even at nearly 50% total CPU (averaged over all cores) load on many of my systems.

Another way to be sure is to try to enable it with ParkControl. If the settings go back to disabled when you restart ParkControl, it is not supported (i'm working on improving this). Note that you can manually edit the registry and 'trick' ParkControl, but you can NOT trick the actual OS.

Something also to keep in mind (for other readers) is that the resource monitor only shows you the parked state during its last sample. In fact, a core may enter and leave parking 100s of times a second!

[edkiefer]

The pre-requisites are at least 2 logical processors and Windows NT 6.0 or above. The supported CPUs vary substantially. Processors as recent as the Phenom II (AMD's famous x6 processor that *still* holds its own since it has 6 truly independent cores) don't support core parking. It is something that can also be toggled in the BIOS on many systems. If your PC supports it, the one thing you can be sure of is that you will see it in the Resource Monitor. No need to try to make your PC idle, it will park even at nearly 50% total CPU (averaged over all cores) load on many of my systems.

Another way to be sure is to try to enable it with ParkControl. If the settings go back to disabled when you restart ParkControl, it is not supported (i'm working on improving this). Note that you can manually edit the registry and 'trick' ParkControl, but you can NOT trick the actual OS.

Something also to keep in mind (for other readers) is that the resource monitor only shows you the parked state during its last sample. In fact, a core may enter and leave parking 100s of times a second!

Ok , thanks I did read up on it but everwhere it is a little hazy on details, I guess this is because of vast HW and software involved .

I didn't try an enable it with parkControl , I did open it but nothing was enabled and values were 0 but that was with hi power profile .

I take it to enable for most it needs to be either hacked or use powercfg command line string ?

I saw a hack that seems to add the option in power option profile , is that the hack you speak of .

IS the parkcontrol editing the reg to do its settings ?

[Jeremy Collake]

Ok , thanks I did read up on it but everwhere it is a little hazy on details, I guess this is because of vast HW and software involved .

I will build into ParkControl the determination of whether the hardware, OS, and BIOS support core parking if possible.

I saw a hack that seems to add the option in power option profile , is that the hack you speak of .

No, that is a different hack. The hack I refer to is people searching their registries for the power UUID of this particular sub-feature of CPU power management, and editing every instance (one instance per power profile). ParkControl only uses these registry entries to quickly *read* the state, it doesn't use them to modify the state. Why? This was just easier.

IS the parkcontrol editing the reg to do its settings ?

No, absolutely NOT. It is doing what powercfg.exe does - uses the NT 6+ Power Management APIs. Like I said, it does use the registry to quickly determine the current configuration though.

[edkiefer]

ok, thanks

that answers all my questions 

Ed

[bertie97]

Just doing a fresh OS install & I've added PL x.36.

The sliders now display properly, but I can no longer assign % PC to the individual power profiles.... 
I haven't tried to edit the ini manually (It takes forever to do an OS etc the way I want it from scratch.)

[Jeremy Collake]

What are you referring to exactly?

[bertie97]

This dialog used to trim the bottom of the slider gfx - not anymore
The ability to set CP per power profile doesn't work.  (Mistakenly put PC in last post not CP!)
I thought it used to?
Or has hours of windows updates made me (more) crazy?   

[BenYeeHua]

Working at here.
With all the update installed.

[Jeremy Collake]

Oh I see what you are talking about. I believe this is a change to your individual Windows display/personalization settings, but is a problem I need to address.

[bertie97]

I still cannot get CP to work per power profile on my new install.  (SSD - clean OS install+win updates)

x.36 installed (PL also uninstalled & reinstalled) will not hold CP settings. 
x.36 does hold these settings on a regular HDD.
eg:-  if I enter - power saver 75%; hi perf  0%; balanced 50% - each setting 'sticks' after hitting apply on the HDD.  (Red herring I think) 
Currently on the SSD when I hit 'apply'  - HP turns off, balanced goes to 50 & PS goes to enabled @0 - regardless of what I enter. 

So I am wondering if I need something that isn't installed yet?  A C++ redist etc?
Maybe I should try an earlier build or edit the ini... will keep playing about as time allows.

[Jeremy Collake]

The situation you describe is odd. Normally I would say the system just does not support core parking. See PatrkControl Core Parking Help.

There are no C++ redistributables required since I use static linking, and you'd know if there was something missing.

Is there ANY OTHER power management software installed? Anything from your OEM or motherboard manufacturer?

In the meantime, I will at least be addressing the cosmetic issues at larger font sizes..

EDIT: I suspect that for some reason Windows has turned off Core Parking after your reinstall. Was it a different edition of Windows?

[bertie97]

Thanks for the quick response.
I thought that all dependencies were covered but was double checking 
The install is the 'same', same media used, only possible/probable differences would be related to updates & the fact that this SSD is AHCI & the other SATA HDD was on IDE mode only.
The original HDD was disconnected but if I switch drives from SSD to old HDD CP is OK again.

How do I check if Windows allows CP?  I can use res mon to see real-time but is there a switch somewhere?

[Jeremy Collake]

There isn't a switch anywhere in Windows, but there is in the BIOS sometimes - though I'd imagine you'd realize if you changed a BIOS setting, so that's not likely. I must think on this more, and also provide more information in ParkControl on the status of core parking (capable or not).

[edkiefer]

So you have 2 boot drives, one HDD and 1 SDD . the SSD is new install ?

Could it be when you installed on SSD you didn't use MB chipset drivers and got windows drivers instead . I don't know if that would make a deference on power config but it might . It is always good idea to disable device drivers from getting window updates till all your hardware have installed manufacture drivers first (MB, Vid ,network etc ).

[bertie97]

@Capt.Bitsum
The BIOS confirms that the CPU Active Core Control (AMD RD890fx) is fully enabled.  (& presumably would have to be for it to work on the HDD install.) 
Basically this type of behavior from PL is why I started this thread when I used a beta version on a mechanical drive.  Connection somewhere in the code?

@edkiefer
ACPI is correctly configured in BIOS
I can multi-boot if there is more than one OS resident drive present.
I have a boot manager on a non-OS HDD that I use to boot various drives as & when. The SSD was installed with no other drives connected using the AHCI setting that SSD apparently require.
The use of the manufacturers drivers is not advised & tests on performance show a 30+% drop in SSD speeds if the non default MS drivers are used.  Win7 generic AHCI drivers correctly identify the controllers & perform a lot better.
Having run with both configs I can say the drivers don't impact PLs failure to behave as previously.

I am wondering what can clash but I haven't figured it out yet....   

[edkiefer]

ok, I don't know on AMD systems, but on Intel I always load Intel MB and drivers (SATA, Chipset etc ). MS doesn't support all features AFAIK .

I don't know on SDD's so can't help there either .

[bertie97]

@edkiefer
NM.  Thanks for thinking about it   

[bertie97]

In my continuing search for differences that would make PL reject CP settings I noticed that :-
New install

OocDisableCoreParkingWhileIn=True

Old install

OocDisableCoreParkingWhileIn=False

Changing it to match had no impact, unsurprisingly.
Where else could I be looking for settings writes?

I have examined my PM settings in BIOS & Win & can see nothing different that would (obviously) impact CP.  BIOS is definitely set to allow CP.
PL just will not accept setting changes it seems. 
I have added all PL files to my AV exclusions on the off-chance.

I have wondered if the SSD GC routines could demand cores to be active but it seems unlikely that that would be able to block PL settings.

I am primarily assuming the CP is not working however, on the basis that the PL dialogs do not respond, it may be simply the dialogs not behaving I guess.

[edkiefer]

Are you using a different controller in device manager between the 2 setups (HDD vs SDD ), any power management settings there ?

OocDisableCoreParkingWhileIn=False

that is setting in probalance screen , last entry . Disable cpu core parking during probalance is restraint .

[BenYeeHua]

Maybe you can try to remove the core in the device manager, and let the os redetect the processor.
Or reinstall os?
----
Just test the HT with Core-parking, soft-disable the HT by using max core to un-park to 50%.
And getting 10% increase with this way, but I lack of time to test that, will it the same by disable HT in bios.

[bertie97]

Had to do a clean install of OS  but there are no  differences that I know of without a byte-for-byte compare.   (no intentional differences that is)
The drives may be a red herring as it is the most obvious difference.  No additional PM seen in dev man.  I am not sure why a drive mode would affect CP.  They should be separate threads as far as PM goes surely? 
I will say that on the HDD the PL install was gradually upgraded to the current build - this was straight into x.36 & now upgraded to x.42.

Didn't expect the restraint/CP setting would make any impact but it was the only difference so tried it to see if there was a domino effect...

Need s/thing to actively display whether CP is active within Win or not to determine whether it is the PL dialog that is broken for some reason.  Once that is obvious I will be able to able to say more.

0cc5b647-c1df-4637-891a-dec35c318583  shows these values - see attached - & has what I would expect to be the normal number of instances & variables for 3 PM profiles.  All reflect the valuemax (100) statement.
Then there are these (sub)statements which can be 100 or 50.  Relevant?

[Jeremy Collake]

The ParkControl dialog determines if parking is enabled by simply checking the registry values associated with it for each power profile. It makes modifications using the proper commands, but checks using this mechanism. Thus, it does NOT do a proper check of system compatibility of CPU core parking. This is on the TODO list ...  If you edit the registry, you can trick ParkControl. You won't trick the OS though.

[bertie97]

That raises the point I am leaning towards - on this install I suspect that something is blocking the PL writes to CP settings.  Comodo isn't logging any blocks to writes & PL is given full exclusions in the AV.  PL believes it has applied the settings but dialogs & registry seem to disagree. 
It doesn't 'feel' like it is applying settings when I click apply, something about the way the dialog closes - not clean if you know what I mean.

I was wondering if there was any prog out there which does display CP activity - I have yet to find one so if it is added to PL it will be useful. 

[Jeremy Collake]

That is possible, though unlikely and not something I've ever heard of. I've only seen cases where the OS refuses to 'take' these values if manually set, and refuses to set them if programmatically instructed to set.

I have been working on showing which cores are parked. Pretty simple to use a different color for them. If it weren't for some daily distraction I'd likely have that done by now.

There are lots of programs out there. The Resource Monitor built into Windows for one, it is great. If this is XP or below, then core parking is not supported by the OS.

[bertie97]

In my case the OS is 7x64 & PL park control works fine on my old install.
Resmon doesn't show me the info I want as far as I can see - ie the OS setting - I am assuming the reg entry above shows that the scheme is possible & active.  Resmon & perfmon only give me the readout that it has come into effect I think.
powercfg/q gives

Power Setting GUID: bc5038f7-23e0-4960-96da-33abaf5935ec  (Maximum processor
state)
      Minimum Possible Setting: 0x00000000
      Maximum Possible Setting: 0x00000064
      Possible Settings increment: 0x00000001
      Possible Settings units: %
    Current AC Power Setting Index: 0x00000064
    Current DC Power Setting Index: 0x00000064

Again I assume this is the correct state as ...0064 is full control is it not?

At this point I am more interested in hunting down why it's not behaving as before...
Not life or death, just something I want to tear apart. 

[Jeremy Collake]

The setting 0x64 = 100d (100%) disables CPU core parking. It is the % of cores that must remain *unparked* at all times. It may be disabled for whatever reason.

[bertie97]

Thanks for that
so it would be
Possible Settings units: 0x64 = 100d (100%)
if CP were to be disabled?
I can't find
0x64 = 100d or 0x64
in the registry so there is something else going on I think.
But I Don't want to drain too much of your time.  I will continue poling around. 

[BenYeeHua]

Maybe ProcessMonitor will help you 

[Jeremy Collake]

I meant, in programmer jargon, 64 hexadecimal is 100 in decimal, which is 100% .. so 100% of your CPUs are set to remain active (unparked) when that value is set for this power profile subsystem sub-setting.

[bertie97]

BYH - I had forgotten about Sysinternals... better dig it up 

I meant, in programmer jargon, .....

I thought it may have been but I thought I'd take a walk on the wild side. 
I must try monitoring failed reg writes.

[BenYeeHua]

I hope you will found the cause~
---
OT
The Pl GUI on the netbook is fine, with just 10-15%(without scrolling)

[bertie97]

After a bit of playing with Procmon:-
Most frequent activity by PL -

15:28:33.6148985   processlasso.exe   2016   RegQueryKey   HKCU   SUCCESS   Query: HandleTags, HandleTags: 0x0
15:28:33.6149136   processlasso.exe   2016   RegCreateKey   HKCU\Software\ProcessLasso   SUCCESS   Desired Access: Read
15:28:33.6149749   processlasso.exe   2016   RegQueryValue   HKCU\Software\ProcessLasso\ColorScheme   SUCCESS   Type: REG_DWORD, Length: 4, Data: 0
15:28:33.6149922   processlasso.exe   2016   RegCloseKey   HKCU\Software\ProcessLasso   SUCCESS   

(Presume GFX updating)

Followed by

15:18:51.0858978   processlasso.exe   2016   RegQueryValue   HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\PERFLIB\Disable Performance Counters   NAME NOT FOUND   Length: 20

& when I try to alter setting in CP control

15:30:27.1539253   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFile   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   SUCCESS   Desired Access: Read Attributes, Disposition: Open, Options: Open For Backup, Open Reparse Point, Attributes: n/a, ShareMode: Read, Write, Delete, AllocationSize: n/a, OpenResult: Opened
15:30:27.1540311   processlasso.exe   2016   QueryBasicInformationFile   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   SUCCESS   CreationTime: 14/07/2009 00:27:42, LastAccessTime: 14/07/2009 00:27:42, LastWriteTime: 14/07/2009 02:39:27, ChangeTime: 26/09/2012 06:18:03, FileAttributes: A
15:30:27.1540526   processlasso.exe   2016   CloseFile   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   SUCCESS   
15:30:27.1541735   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFile   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   SUCCESS   Desired Access: Generic Read, Disposition: Open, Options: Synchronous IO Non-Alert, Non-Directory File, Attributes: n/a, ShareMode: Read, Delete, AllocationSize: n/a, OpenResult: Opened
15:30:27.1543075   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   FILE LOCKED WITH ONLY READERS   SyncType: SyncTypeCreateSection, PageProtection:
15:30:27.1543835   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   SUCCESS   SyncType: SyncTypeOther
15:30:27.1544653   processlasso.exe   2016   Load Image   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   SUCCESS   Image Base: 0xff540000, Image Size: 0x16000
15:30:27.1544852   processlasso.exe   2016   CloseFile   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   SUCCESS   
15:30:27.1546946   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFile   C:\Windows\System32\en-US\powercfg.exe.mui   SUCCESS   Desired Access: Generic Read, Disposition: Open, Options: , Attributes: n/a, ShareMode: Read, Delete, AllocationSize: n/a, OpenResult: Opened
15:30:27.1547395   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Windows\System32\en-US\powercfg.exe.mui   FILE LOCKED WITH ONLY READERS   SyncType: SyncTypeCreateSection, PageProtection:
15:30:27.1547565   processlasso.exe   2016   QueryStandardInformationFile   C:\Windows\System32\en-US\powercfg.exe.mui   SUCCESS   AllocationSize: 57,344, EndOfFile: 54,272, NumberOfLinks: 2, DeletePending: False, Directory: False
15:30:27.1548046   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Windows\System32\en-US\powercfg.exe.mui   SUCCESS   SyncType: SyncTypeOther
15:30:27.1548610   processlasso.exe   2016   CloseFile   C:\Windows\System32\en-US\powercfg.exe.mui   SUCCESS   
15:30:27.1550733   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFile   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   SUCCESS   Desired Access: Read Attributes, Disposition: Open, Options: Open For Backup, Open Reparse Point, Attributes: n/a, ShareMode: Read, Write, Delete, AllocationSize: n/a, OpenResult: Opened
15:30:27.1551689   processlasso.exe   2016   QueryBasicInformationFile   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   SUCCESS   CreationTime: 14/07/2009 00:27:42, LastAccessTime: 14/07/2009 00:27:42, LastWriteTime: 14/07/2009 02:39:27, ChangeTime: 26/09/2012 06:18:03, FileAttributes: A
15:30:27.1551884   processlasso.exe   2016   CloseFile   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   SUCCESS   
15:30:27.1552975   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFile   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   SUCCESS   Desired Access: Generic Read, Disposition: Open, Options: Synchronous IO Non-Alert, Non-Directory File, Attributes: n/a, ShareMode: Read, Delete, AllocationSize: n/a, OpenResult: Opened
15:30:27.1553972   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   FILE LOCKED WITH ONLY READERS   SyncType: SyncTypeCreateSection, PageProtection:
15:30:27.1554597   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   SUCCESS   SyncType: SyncTypeOther
15:30:27.1555114   processlasso.exe   2016   Load Image   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   SUCCESS   Image Base: 0xff540000, Image Size: 0x16000
15:30:27.1555287   processlasso.exe   2016   CloseFile   C:\Windows\System32\powercfg.exe   SUCCESS   
15:30:27.1557352   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFile   C:\Windows\System32\en-US\powercfg.exe.mui   SUCCESS   Desired Access: Generic Read, Disposition: Open, Options: , Attributes: n/a, ShareMode: Read, Delete, AllocationSize: n/a, OpenResult: Opened
15:30:27.1557948   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Windows\System32\en-US\powercfg.exe.mui   FILE LOCKED WITH ONLY READERS   SyncType: SyncTypeCreateSection, PageProtection:
15:30:27.1558106   processlasso.exe   2016   QueryStandardInformationFile   C:\Windows\System32\en-US\powercfg.exe.mui   SUCCESS   AllocationSize: 57,344, EndOfFile: 54,272, NumberOfLinks: 2, DeletePending: False, Directory: False
15:30:27.1558461   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Windows\System32\en-US\powercfg.exe.mui   SUCCESS   SyncType: SyncTypeOther
15:30:27.1558978   processlasso.exe   2016   CloseFile   C:\Windows\System32\en-US\powercfg.exe.mui   SUCCESS   

& I did find this -

15:21:30.1228489   processlasso.exe   2016   Thread Exit      SUCCESS   Thread ID: 5560, User Time: 0.0000000, Kernel Time: 0.0156001
15:21:30.7256173   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   Desired Access: Read Attributes, Disposition: Open, Options: Open For Backup, Open Reparse Point, Attributes: n/a, ShareMode: Read, Write, Delete, AllocationSize: n/a, OpenResult: Opened
15:21:30.7256535   processlasso.exe   2016   QueryBasicInformationFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   CreationTime: 30/09/2012 17:28:56, LastAccessTime: 27/09/2012 10:53:54, LastWriteTime: 07/10/2012 06:44:38, ChangeTime: 07/10/2012 13:47:12, FileAttributes: ANCI
15:21:30.7256702   processlasso.exe   2016   CloseFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   
15:21:30.7257741   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   Desired Access: Generic Read, Disposition: Open, Options: Synchronous IO Non-Alert, Non-Directory File, Attributes: n/a, ShareMode: Read, Delete, AllocationSize: n/a, OpenResult: Opened
15:21:30.7258257   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   FILE LOCKED WITH ONLY READERS   SyncType: SyncTypeCreateSection, PageProtection:
15:21:30.7258844   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   SyncType: SyncTypeOther
15:21:30.7259405   processlasso.exe   2016   Load Image   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   Image Base: 0x13f850000, Image Size: 0x2d000
15:21:30.7259581   processlasso.exe   2016   CloseFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   
15:21:30.7261544   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   Desired Access: Read Attributes, Disposition: Open, Options: Open For Backup, Open Reparse Point, Attributes: n/a, ShareMode: Read, Write, Delete, AllocationSize: n/a, OpenResult: Opened
15:21:30.7261852   processlasso.exe   2016   QueryBasicInformationFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   CreationTime: 30/09/2012 17:28:56, LastAccessTime: 27/09/2012 10:53:54, LastWriteTime: 07/10/2012 06:44:38, ChangeTime: 07/10/2012 13:47:12, FileAttributes: ANCI
15:21:30.7262009   processlasso.exe   2016   CloseFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   
15:21:30.7262936   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   Desired Access: Generic Read, Disposition: Open, Options: Synchronous IO Non-Alert, Non-Directory File, Attributes: n/a, ShareMode: Read, Delete, AllocationSize: n/a, OpenResult: Opened
15:21:30.7263362   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   FILE LOCKED WITH ONLY READERS   SyncType: SyncTypeCreateSection, PageProtection:
15:21:30.7263869   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   SyncType: SyncTypeOther
15:21:30.7264324   processlasso.exe   2016   Load Image   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   Image Base: 0x13f850000, Image Size: 0x2d000
15:21:30.7264478   processlasso.exe   2016   CloseFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   

Nothing jumps out at me but I hope that's just me! 

[bertie97]

one more for luck

15:40:29.5338368   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   Desired Access: Read Attributes, Disposition: Open, Options: Open For Backup, Open Reparse Point, Attributes: n/a, ShareMode: Read, Write, Delete, AllocationSize: n/a, OpenResult: Opened
15:40:29.5338750   processlasso.exe   2016   QueryBasicInformationFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   CreationTime: 30/09/2012 17:28:56, LastAccessTime: 27/09/2012 10:53:54, LastWriteTime: 07/10/2012 06:44:38, ChangeTime: 07/10/2012 13:47:12, FileAttributes: ANCI
15:40:29.5338958   processlasso.exe   2016   CloseFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   
15:40:29.5340100   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   Desired Access: Generic Read, Disposition: Open, Options: Synchronous IO Non-Alert, Non-Directory File, Attributes: n/a, ShareMode: Read, Delete, AllocationSize: n/a, OpenResult: Opened
15:40:29.5340651   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   FILE LOCKED WITH ONLY READERS   SyncType: SyncTypeCreateSection, PageProtection:
15:40:29.5341315   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   SyncType: SyncTypeOther
15:40:29.5342146   processlasso.exe   2016   Load Image   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   Image Base: 0x13f130000, Image Size: 0x2d000
15:40:29.5342351   processlasso.exe   2016   CloseFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   
15:40:29.5344727   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   Desired Access: Read Attributes, Disposition: Open, Options: Open For Backup, Open Reparse Point, Attributes: n/a, ShareMode: Read, Write, Delete, AllocationSize: n/a, OpenResult: Opened
15:40:29.5345263   processlasso.exe   2016   QueryBasicInformationFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   CreationTime: 30/09/2012 17:28:56, LastAccessTime: 27/09/2012 10:53:54, LastWriteTime: 07/10/2012 06:44:38, ChangeTime: 07/10/2012 13:47:12, FileAttributes: ANCI
15:40:29.5345548   processlasso.exe   2016   CloseFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   
15:40:29.5346783   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   Desired Access: Generic Read, Disposition: Open, Options: Synchronous IO Non-Alert, Non-Directory File, Attributes: n/a, ShareMode: Read, Delete, AllocationSize: n/a, OpenResult: Opened
15:40:29.5347354   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   FILE LOCKED WITH ONLY READERS   SyncType: SyncTypeCreateSection, PageProtection:
15:40:29.5348130   processlasso.exe   2016   CreateFileMapping   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   SyncType: SyncTypeOther
15:40:29.5348681   processlasso.exe   2016   Load Image   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   Image Base: 0x13f130000, Image Size: 0x2d000
15:40:29.5348864   processlasso.exe   2016   CloseFile   C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ParkControl.exe   SUCCESS   

Build x.57b BTW

[BenYeeHua]

Wait...
Did the ProBalance "disable CPU Core Parking" also did not work?
And why you filter only processlasso.exe, but not ParkControl.exe?

[Jeremy Collake]

I don't know the point of any of the posts, but maybe I am missing something? The ProcMon logs all look exactly normal.

[bertie97]

@ BYH - look again.  Parkcontrol is recorded above.

The point of the posts -
https://bitsum.com/forum/index.php/topic,1702.msg8883.html#msg8883

I'm looking for an anomaly which would explain why the CP dialogs apparently no longer allow me to assign individual settings per power profile.  [They do not update/hold updated settings when 'apply' is hit]
I guess I could record the screen activity as a movie file to prove I'm not just making this up.

I'd imagined recording my reg activity might reveal something.  The fact it doesn't appear to suggest the problem lies elsewhere.

[Jeremy Collake]

Actually, before I make a butt of myself again, let me investigate this more thoroughly before I dismiss it ... there may be some bug in the Apply button, I will check the logic to be sure! However, for any reader, if the ParkControl settings do not seem to 'take' after you restart the utility, then it means your PC is not compatible with core parking. Whether the CPU, the OS, or the BIOS.

I will report back on this.

[BenYeeHua]

Parkcontrol is recorded above.

I only saw that, the PL process is open/closing the Parkcontrol.
And the PL is setting the Core-parking.
You should monitor also the Parkcontrol process, so you can see what it is doing.

if the ParkControl settings do not seem to 'take' after you restart the utility, then it means your PC is not compatible with core parking. Whether the CPU, the OS, or the BIOS.

Nope, just has some test with a bios that disable c3&c6 before.
The core-parking is stop working, but the setting is still can be set, can be read correctly, and I can use "max-core remain parking" to soft-disable the HT core

[Jeremy Collake]

Yea, there may very well be some logistical errors in certain usage patterns, I am checking it out. I definitely need to add some good real-time monitoring, as well as detection of whether parking is even available.

[bertie97]

To reiterate, it's not life & death, but I would like to know why CP 'stopped working' on a clean OS install.
Attached image suggests CP is available to me (if not to everyone).  1090T+890fx

Knowing you won't have a system config'd exactly the same as I have, means I am poking around to see if I can render any useful data to the investigation.
The reason I'm noticing anomalies is the fact that the CP dialog won't hold settings despite saying it has succeeded.
Any other debugging tools I can run to snapshot the events that would be useful?

@BYH - the coreparking.exe was only invoked once during settings 'change' & the reg capture.  I expected to be invoked several times as I made several changes.
I used a filter related to all PL processes.

[BenYeeHua]

Some of the HPET and Core-Parking.
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=368604
And it seen like the power saving on the windows 8
bcdedit /set disabledynamictick yes
Is also causing the gaming performance is reduced.
The HPET is based on the motherboard, maybe there are difference chip???
----
And
http://lists.ntp.org/pipermail/hackers/2012-March/005553.html
So will some software(like games) will getting the performance from the microsecond-precision, or it is can use only with watching the time?

[bertie97]

BYH - interesting but my 7 install isn't impacted by altering HPET as far as CP goes.
PL will not (appear to) hold any CP settings beyond default in the dialog.
Now on x.73b

[BenYeeHua]

HPET(Timer Resolution) is affect the DPC delays
So that the graphic card driver(if playing online game, network card also) can transfer the data ASAP
Some person disable that in BIOS can get a better result, but it need a stable TSC, a stable frequency with the processor(if I am right ).
So it need to disable many power save like EIST, C3&C6 etc when disable HPET, maybe a overclocker with all of this(and HPET) disable will getting a better Timer Resolution.

And some person get a smoother mouse with HPET enable in bios and os, but they are not saying that, which mouse hz are they are using.
125hz, 500hz or 1000hz?

The information is insufficient, and with the game windowed, it is affect by DWM(vsync) also.

I will Google more about it first. 
----
Maybe your user name, computer name etc is affecting the ParkControl?
Or maybe you has disable the power save(with registry) to getting a better result of SSD?
A reinstall or changing the windows installer is some ways that I know.

[Jeremy Collake]

Dunno what this is all about exactly, but HPET is only useful for measurements afaik, it in itself doesn't speed anything up. It does let developers know how fast code is and things like that - and allow for more precise multimedia playback and other operations I suppose. Anyway, that is what a timer is. The default timer is 10ms, which suffices for most tasks, but not for many tasks.

Note that it has nothing to do with CPU scheduling too, as it is again simply a timer. Windows NT6+ actually uses a cycle based CPU scheduling approach that is pretty cool, instead of time slices they are more like cycle slices.

The QueryPerformanceCounter and related APIs are used to access any higher precision counter available, which is normally always available - at least since 2005. I use it for code profiling, e.g. determining how fast something executes. Rarely I have a need to use a high precision timer in the wild, though it does happen - Process Lasso uses them in places.

Summary:

HPET is *nothing* related to performance, at *all*. It is just a high precision clock to get the current time, used for comparing times. It is also useful for multimedia playback that must remain in sync, etc...
Do not muck around with the default timing precision of your system.