# Kernel 5.8.1 now on Stable **URL:** \ **Category:** Lounge\ **Created:** [August 15, 2020, 4:29am UTC](https://forum.endeavouros.com/t/kernel-5-8-1-now-on-stable/6952 "2020-08-15T04:29:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Stephane](https://forum.endeavouros.com/user_avatar/forum.endeavouros.com/stephane/32/9196_2.png) [@Stephane](https://forum.endeavouros.com/u/Stephane)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2020, 8:26am UTC](https://forum.endeavouros.com/t/kernel-5-8-1-now-on-stable/6952/41 "2020-08-24T08:26:13Z")
we have also a report > **[Kernel 5.8.x my system seems to be only running at it’s minimum clock of 800mhz](https://forum.manjaro.org/t/kernel-5-8-x-my-system-seems-to-be-only-running-at-it-s-minimum-clock-of-800mhz/2919/5)** > > The system was significantly slower than usual even when logging in or starting applications. After a while of wondering what was going on, I looked at conky and noticed that it was stuck at 800mhz, which would not change. Output of inxi MCxxa... ---
**Author:** ![Schlaefer](https://forum.endeavouros.com/user_avatar/forum.endeavouros.com/schlaefer/32/11917_2.png) [@Schlaefer](https://forum.endeavouros.com/u/Schlaefer)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2020, 8:44am UTC](https://forum.endeavouros.com/t/kernel-5-8-1-now-on-stable/6952/42 "2020-08-24T08:44:38Z")
> [@Stephane](#): > > we have also a report Interesting. I have a Kaby Lake i5-8250U laptop on manjaro latest stable with 5.8.1 and everything is fine (powersave & performance, no throttling on powersave). And as I said, I’m 99.9% sure the desktop (EOS) was fine on 5.8.1 and 5.8.2, here it started with 5.8.3. ---
**Author:** ![keybreak](https://forum.endeavouros.com/user_avatar/forum.endeavouros.com/keybreak/32/9257_2.png) [@keybreak](https://forum.endeavouros.com/u/keybreak)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2020, 8:47am UTC](https://forum.endeavouros.com/t/kernel-5-8-1-now-on-stable/6952/43 "2020-08-24T08:47:28Z")
Biggest Kernel release… Kinda what i expected, biggest amount of problems 😅 KISS Tux 🐧, KISS 💏 ---
**Author:** ![Schlaefer](https://forum.endeavouros.com/user_avatar/forum.endeavouros.com/schlaefer/32/11917_2.png) [@Schlaefer](https://forum.endeavouros.com/u/Schlaefer)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2020, 11:11am UTC](https://forum.endeavouros.com/t/kernel-5-8-1-now-on-stable/6952/44 "2020-08-24T11:11:15Z")
OK, from my limited understanding looking at the code - and this is the first C code I tried to read in 20 years: [1] changes the intel\_pstate driver so that everything before Broadwell isn’t running `intel_pstate` but `intel_cpufreq`. The good news: there’s an undocumented `intel_pstate=active` which brings back `intel_pstate`. PS: There’s also heavy refactoring going on for 5.9 which seems to affect Broadwell and older. [edit] There it also documents the new behavior (“optional”) [2]: > **Active Mode Without HWP** > This operation mode is optional for processors that do not support the HWP feature or when the `intel_pstate=no_hwp` argument is passed to the kernel in the command line. The active mode is used in those cases if the `intel_pstate=active` argument is passed to the kernel in the command line. HWP is supported in Skylake and later. [1] [https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/39a188b88332545073b8e07633f5e3298e066b61](https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/39a188b88332545073b8e07633f5e3298e066b61) [2] [https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/Documentation/admin-guide/pm/intel\_pstate.rst#active-mode-without-hwp](https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/Documentation/admin-guide/pm/intel_pstate.rst#active-mode-without-hwp) ---
**Author:** ![Schlaefer](https://forum.endeavouros.com/user_avatar/forum.endeavouros.com/schlaefer/32/11917_2.png) [@Schlaefer](https://forum.endeavouros.com/u/Schlaefer)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2020, 5:21pm UTC](https://forum.endeavouros.com/t/kernel-5-8-1-now-on-stable/6952/45 "2020-08-28T17:21:44Z")
5.8.4 is in the repo! 5.8.5: Hold my beer … [Previous page](https://forum.endeavouros.com/t/kernel-5-8-1-now-on-stable/6952.md?page=2)