** Changed in: linux-2.6 (Debian)
Status: Incomplete = Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/524281
Title:
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Assignee: Matúš Behun (matus-behun) = (unassigned)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/524281
Title:
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) = Matúš Behun (matus-behun)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/524281
Title:
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load
The desired commit has been applied an released in Lucid (and all other
stable kernels). Please update with the latest SRU kernel.
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
Yuppie, now it seems again that I have found the good combination:
- Nothing fixes the cpu frequency flickering. The laptop just shits on the
cpufreq settings and decides on its own, what is the best frequency for me.
Come on... Sucks.
- This Load balancing tick bullshit stopped when I
I think I had the same problem on a Dell Latitude E4300 (Core 2/P9300)
and the interesting thing was that the overload happened mostly when the
laptop was being charged and when I removed the AC adapter to run on
battery, after some minutes, the laptop was responsible again. In my
case, when this
A bit off-topic to my previous comment: The PPA version of the intel
driver did not make any difference, however, the bluetooth causes the
system hang before or after suspend if it is enabled. I did not mind too
much just disabled the bluetooth in the Bios.
Now, the system seems to be stable.
--
I have updated my tests for both the latest 2.6.38 kernel of natty and the
latest 2.6.34 kernel from mainline as suggested, on my Thinkpad T61 laptop.
After login I have sudoed previously, then run:
sudo powertop -d -t 60 ~/Desktop/powertop_dump-`uname -r`.log
Running on battery, not having
Yes I have also seen a similar degradation between the two kernels. What
is notable in your case and mine is that the kernel interrupts are
labelled differently between the two cases. There are actually fewer
load balancing ticks in the later kernel but other categories eg [extra
timer interrupt]
On 5/17/2011 10:59 PM, skhawam wrote:
-Compiz generates a lot of wakeups on the GPU, so I removed all the features
that I dont use and kept only the ones I use
I once found a DRI configuration utility that could disable vsync and
found that got rid of a lot of wakeups from the GPU.
--
You
That script looks useful, thanks for posting it.
I've all turned round on the subject. I ran Ubuntu Classic (no effects)
and ran powertop with no apps running. It was significantly better than
in Ubuntu 10.10. It was actually really good. The red bar in powertop
that shows wakeups-from-idle
I have a Dell Mini 10v and managed to get good results with Natty
(11.04) after some fiddling around. It's better than any other version I
had till now (I have been following this bug since its beginning!).
Without wireless I get 20ms C3 state, and with wireless one around 3ms
C3 state (with no
My two cents is that I was waiting for Ubuntu Natty for a newer kernel
and therefore better performance, but I appear to have more wakeups and
less battery life than before.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
I'm with oldmankit on this - the situation is getting worse rather than
better. I wrote a script mostly based on lesswatts.org suggestions
which, for my HP Probook 4720s halves wakeups (still at 50/sec) and
reduces fan usage. Use at your own discretion :-)
** Attachment added: implements known
Only a few weeks ago I started looking for the root cause of my laptop's
noise and heat. I used Ubuntu Lucid 10.04 on a dual core laptop and
eventually found this bug.
I tried newer kernels from
https://launchpad.net/~kernel-ppa/+archive/ppa?field.series_filter=lucid
Unfortunately, experience
This bug I suppose is the root cause of the second power consumption regression
found here:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=linux_kernel_regress2
Basically power usage looks like:
- 2.6.24-2.6.34: average of all tests ~21-22W
- 2.6.35-2.6.37: average of all tests ~25W
-
The last two comments on this bug are contradictory. Checking powertop
with the 2.6.38 kernel for natty versus earlier kernels shows for me
that the *type* of kernel interrupt has changed but the number of them
has not and has increased if anything. I think this bug is serious and
getting worse
I tried Natty, this bug is finally solved with the 2.6.38 kernel
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/524281
Title:
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick
on
@Jeremy Foshee, this seems to be a regression between Lucid alpha 2 and
alpha 3, and it's affecting LTS users with MUCH lower battery life than
expected, hence it's a hardware problem.
Please could you reconsider your rejection for Lucid?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
ggonlp: it might be the case, that 2.6.36 fixes balancing wakeups, but
introduces worker wakeups. 2.6.37 and 2.6.38 should be okay on the other
hand. Have you tried those?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Sorry, not yet - thanks for the hint though. I'm on an HP laptop and new
kernels mean for me every time an odyssey as graphics and wifi will take
a good day's work to get running :-(
On 03/08/2011 10:43 PM, Peter Sasi wrote:
ggonlp: it might be the case, that 2.6.36 fixes balancing wakeups,
I'm seeing this too on Ubuntu Maverick 32-bit (kernel 2.6.35-27-generic-
pae) on an Intel Core Duo quad core 3 GHz processor. Around 50% [kernel
scheduler] Load balancing tick pretty much continously.
My apologies if this has already been explained somewhere, but exactly
what is a load balancing
@Captain Chaos: To keep it short: These ticks are imposed by the Linux
Kernel while trying to shift balance the workload over the available
CPU cores. The problem here is, that these ticks occur during idling
phases and therefore inhibit the CPUs to fall into their power-saving
states. A little
@Benjamin Schmid: I think the fix is done in the Linux tree (practically all
versions later than 2.6.35 behave a lot better), it just has not been ported
back to the ubuntu 2.6.35 tree...
And it is much annoying...
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs,
This problem appeared in 2.6.32 Kernel.
Beginning with 2.6.37 Kernel this is solved.
I observe increased battery life (+15-20%) in my old laptop.
sudo powertop, agrees with this impression
Ubuntu users can use this kernel
http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/?C=M;O=D
but they are going
This is fixed in the current Natty (beta) with kernel 2.6.38-5-generic
(the stock kernel).
On Maverick I was getting several hundred wakeups per second on the
stock kernel (2.6.35-something), almost all from the load balancing
tick.
Now the load balancing tick is rarely listed in the 'top causes
I remember trying that out a few weeks ago (think it was a 2.6.36
kernel). While the load balancer wakeups were gone, I got just as many
from a kworker process, so no real improvement...
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
powertop on Asus U35JC with Intel Core i3
Top causes for wakeups:
47.5% (228.6) [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick
26.9% (129.6) firefox-bin
3.5% ( 16.9) thunderbird-bin
2.7% ( 13.0) USB device 2-1.3 : USB Receiver (Logitech)
Tried linux-image-2.6.37-020637rc2-generic
@florinn: Please close all applications (especially firefox and
thunderbird) before posting such measurements. In your case, firefox is
probably running some heavy animations or executing some scripts with
many timeouts. It is not the kernel's fault that the user-space is
generating useless
florinn:
that's my experience too, 2.6.37 makes my laptop silent again, and the load
balancing ticks are much, much fewer.
I see that you run the RC2 version of 2.6.37, just thought I'd mention
that the final version of 2.6.37 is out on http://kernel.ubuntu.com
/~kernel-ppa/mainline/. The name
Really an annoying bug. Why will it not be fixed in LTS? Really a
showstopper on mobile systems.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/524281
Title:
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel
Same problem here on a Thinkpad Edge 11 AMD Neo II K325:
Wakeups-from-idle per second : 355.6 interval: 15.0s
49.5% (313.0) [Rescheduling interrupts] kernel IPI
19.7% (124.3) [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick
Would be great if this problem can be solved with Natty.
--
You
Benjamin Schmid:
As long as Natty uses the 2.6.36 or later, this should not be a problem - it is
a kernel issue, not an issue related to Ubuntu alone.
WebNull:
It will most definitely extend your battery life! Using the mainline kernel has
helped a lot :)
--
You received this bug notification
On Intel Celeron 900 mhz i have same problem, powertop reports me
[kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick at the top (15-30%).
Fixing this bug my Tablet PC's battery life will extend i think.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
For the learned .
Adding as a point to start with .. no guarantees that this is the Saviour
just a lead to who can get the heads and tails out of it
# diff -cp tick-sched.c(2.6.37-rc4) tick-sched.c(2.6.25-23)
...
*** tick.sched-2.6.37-rc4.c 2010-12-06 17:50:03.960025002
Exploring the latest code on github. Comparing the two.
Again, no guarantees. This is just a lead, for the brave at heart
--- tick-sched-2.6.35-23.c 2010-12-06 22:44:02.821102001 +0530
+++ tick-sched-2.6.37-github.c 2010-12-06 22:42:40.451102001 +0530
@@ -405,13 +405,7 @@ void
Just installed the 2.6.36 mainline kernel from http://kernel.ubuntu.com
/~kernel-ppa/mainline/v2.6.36-maverick/.
VMWare Player is not working, but that's another story.
[kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick = 2.3
[extra timer interrupt] = 11.7
Total interrupts under idle conditions = 66.7
@Gurmeet
It all sounds very positive. For those of us that don't want to get
their fingers dirty playing around with different kernel versions, there
will be a lot of satisfaction when this fix finds itself into the
official repos!
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
The commit to backport would be 83cd4fe, which has many more changes
than just to kernel/time/tick-sched.c You can look at the complete diff
at https://github.com/mirrors/linux-2.6/commit/83cd4fe
af5ab27 might also help somewhat, but I believe the other one is the
major culprit.
--
You
That would be awesome Alex. I'm really looking forward to resolving this
long standing issue with the LTS version of Ubuntu.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/524281
Title:
Tens of
Just tried the v2.6.37-rc2-maverick from Ubuntu Mainline.
The load balancing ticks are down to 2 (in words, two) from 60 or so per second.
Ran it for a few minutes. M/c is less noisy and temperatures are down by a bit
(1-2 deg), but that can be very well be within a margin of error.
I run
Finally got the 2.6.36 mainline kernel to work with both ATI and Nvidia drivers!
Wrote a little howto here: http://www.bjortvedtdata.net/?p=199
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/524281
I tried the mainline 2.6.36 kernel and it seems to work better, but I do get a
lot of kworker wakeups.
I also cannot get the ATI driver to work (downloaded from ati.amd.com) when
running this kernel, so it's pretty useless.
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick
Just a me-too report. i am also getting this as the top of the list when
seen with powertop.
Average around 43 is the number of wakeups/sec from [Kernel Scheduler]
Load Balancing Tick.
I don't want to disable compiz, so haven't yet tried out the workaround
as at-least for me, that's not a
Following up on one of the earlier mails containing a patch from Brian Rogers
Patch Details:
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/52089149/0001-Apply-patch-from-http-lkml.org-lkml-2010-7-8-122.patch
OK, in 2.6.35, linux-source, on line 328 in /kernel/time/tick-sched.c, this is
what I see:
if
Gurmeet, please try kernel 2.6.36.
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick on Core 2
Duo even with only 1 core enabled
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/524281
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
[Looks to be a kernel bug rather than xorg. If there is actual work to
be done on xorg in relation to this issue, please file a new bug report
about it, since this one has gotten too long to grok.]
** Changed in: xorg (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Invalid
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged = Confirmed
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick on Core 2
Duo even with only 1 core enabled
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/524281
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs,
** Attachment added: powertopLenovoR61Core2DuoT7100.txt
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/524281/+attachment/1731649/+files/powertopLenovoR61Core2DuoT7100.txt
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick on Core 2
Duo even with only 1 core
I have found that this bug is related to X: without that there is no
problem!
I have accidentally deleted the nvidia kernel module, thus my laptop booted
into text mode. Then I run the powertop dump and the [kernel scheduler] Load
balancing tick is down to 1,6 from 64,2 with X with the same
** Attachment added: powertop-dump-5min-2.6.35-22-generic.txt
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/524281/+attachment/1722663/+files/powertop-dump-5min-2.6.35-22-generic.txt
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick on Core 2
Duo even with only 1
I also did the test with mainline kernel 2.6.36 final. It is slightly
better than 2.6.35-22 with X and much worse than that without, because
in both cases it has more than 100 wakeups from kworker/0:0.
Logs attached.
** Attachment added: powertop-dump-5min-noX-2.6.36-020636-generic.txt
** Attachment added: powertop-dump-5min-2.6.36-020636-generic.txt
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/524281/+attachment/1722665/+files/powertop-dump-5min-2.6.36-020636-generic.txt
** Also affects: xorg (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
Tens of wakes
Xcausing wakeups may coincide with enabled composing. On my Intel
chipset graphics, this
causes approx. an additional 50 wakeups per second. If composing is
disabled, everything is
back to normal. On another notebook with a Radeon 5470 (using fglrx),
there was no such
difference.
In addition, it
On my Intel 945GM
with no compiz or effects
tried to explicitly disable composite in xorg.conf as per previous comment
makes NO difference to me.
hundreds of wakeups, and my netbook is now at 55 minutes uptime by battery.
It feels like having an... umbilical cable.
Ubuntu 10.10 with latest
Here is the output from sudo powertop -t60 -d on Lenovo 3000 n200 with intel
centrino 550 @ 2.00 GHz with nVidia Geforce Go 7300 and nVidia Proprietary
driver enabled on Maverick UNE Unity fully updated.
No application was running in background!
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel
** Attachment added: PowerTop Unity
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xorg/+bug/524281/+attachment/1722742/+files/PowerTop%20Unity
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick on Core 2
Duo even with only 1 core enabled
Please note, that X is not causing wakeups itself, but it induces [kernel
scheduler] Load balancing ticks to occour, in my tests.
I have compiz disabled.
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick on Core 2
Duo even with only 1 core enabled
Linux shadow 2.6.35-22-generic #35-Ubuntu SMP Sat Oct 16 20:45:36 UTC
2010 x86_64 GNU/Linux
** Attachment added: powerTopAcer5520g.txt
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/524281/+attachment/1722961/+files/powerTopAcer5520g.txt
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel
Results on a X200s with recent Maverick are in favor of the
2.6.35-23-generic stock kernel rather than Brian's
2.6.35-power+18-generic:
** Attachment added: output from: powertop -d -t 300
** Attachment added: output from: powertop -d -t 300
2.6.35-power+18-generic.powertop
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/524281/+attachment/1717162/+files/2.6.35-power%2B18-generic.powertop
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick on Core 2
I am seeing similar results as Elias Julkunen with 2.6.26-rc7 kernel
from mainline kernels. My system is an Acer 3820T-5246 with Core i3-350M
(no GPU). Kernel scheduler Load balancing ticks have dropped from about
120-230 on 2.6.35.x to a range of about 11 to 28. Even with the added
wakeups from
Err that was supposed to be with 2.6.36-rc7 kernel from mainline
kernels...
Also noticing that laptopmode is keeping the hard drive spun down for
the ~5min its supposed to, whereas under 2.6.35 it was spinning back up
multiple times each minute...
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel
The latest kernel update, 2.6.32-25-generic, has changed things a bit. At least
in my case. Granted, I have changed some things to prevent cpu wakeups by
adding hpet=force nohz=off highres=off to the GRUB CMDLINE since the kernel
update 2.6.32-24 update. At that time Load Balancing ticks were
Suffering this problem too.
Maverick with latest updates (maverick-security / maverick-updates enabled only)
Makes my laptop unusable and ubuntu not fitting its purpose.
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick on Core 2
Duo even with only 1 core enabled
Hi! I'm using Ubuntu 10.10 with the latest updates. Here's my results
for sudo powertop -d -t 300 with three different kernels; default,
mainline and Brian's. I ran that command right after I got to the
desktop, so there's no programs opened.
** Attachment added: powertop_2.6.35-22-generic.log
** Attachment added: powertop_2.6.35-power+18-generic.log
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/524281/+attachment/1640019/+files/powertop_2.6.35-power%2B18-generic.log
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick on Core 2
Duo even with only 1 core
** Attachment added: powertop_2.6.36-020636rc5-generic.log
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/524281/+attachment/1640029/+files/powertop_2.6.36-020636rc5-generic.log
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick on Core 2
Duo even with only 1 core
@Andy:
I'm running a fully-up-to-date Maverick, and still getting tons of
wakeups from load balancing ticks. It's consistently the top one, at:
28.1% (200.1) [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick
That's with:
Linux sidnei-laptop 2.6.35-20-generic #29-Ubuntu SMP Fri Sep 3
14:55:28 UTC
Also running a self-compiled 2.6.35-rc3, it is amazing on my Atom netbook, but
Load Balancing ticks are still skyrocketing on my Athlon II dual core. Do I need
to enable any config option I have missed? (Used the mainline kernel PPA on
the Atom, compiled myself for the Athlon II to include a
The thread at:
https://groups.google.com/group/zen_kernel/browse_thread/thread/71a306f1a3a7b318?pli=1
Mentions this patch which seems slightly meaningful:
http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1007.3/01096.html
And this other patch, which seems like it's the real thing:
Seems like this is what got merged into Linus tree:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=396e894d289d69bacf5acd983c97cd6e21a14c08
Although this seems to be meaningful too:
@Sidnei -- the meat of those changes seems to be the first one. This
fix has already hit the Maverick kernel via stable. Could you test the
Maverick kernel (this should work on Lucid no problem) and report if
that helps at all. Please report back here.
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel
Declining the Maverick specific nomination for now and leaving this open
against the actively developed Ubuntu kernel (which happens to be
Maverick at this time). Will re-open the nomination should a fix be
narrowed down which we can confirm specifically resolves this issue in
Maverick.
--
Tens
Rocko,
Is that kernel available for testing anywhere? Sounds interesting...
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick on Core 2
Duo even with only 1 core enabled
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/524281
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
@Richard: The easiest way is to try 2.6.36-rc3 is to grab Ubuntu's deb
packages from http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-
ppa/mainline/v2.6.36-rc3-maverick. I don't think the desktop
responsiveness patches will affect the load balancing tick, but if
you're interested in building a kernel with them, I
Rocko,
Tried it and there wasn't a great deal of difference overall on my Thinkpad X300
The Load balancing ticks dropped some but
were replaced by a new item called kworker/0:0
Here is the result from powertop -d
Wakeups-from-idle per second : 226.3interval: 15.0s
no ACPI power usage
I get the kworker wakeups as well, although they are not always higher
than the load balancing tick - I found if I left things alone they
dropped much lower.
The most interesting thing for me was that applying the load-balancing
patches to 2.6.35 saved 1-2 W in the estimated ACPI power usage, and
FWIW, the 2.6.36-rc3 kernel (modified only with some desktop
responsiveness patches) shows a much lower rate of load balancing ticks.
On my system 2.6.35.4 (unmodified) was showing 50-60 ticks per second,
or 35-40 with the load balancing patches, while 2.6.36-rc3 is showing
around 15-22.
--
Tens
** Also affects: archlinux
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick on Core 2
Duo even with only 1 core enabled
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/524281
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
My results for the power kernel:
Wakeups-from-idle per second : 249.2interval: 300.0s
no ACPI power usage estimate available
Top causes for wakeups:
29.7% ( 72.9) [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick
14.2% ( 34.9) docky
8.6% ( 21.0) [extra timer interrupt]
8.1% ( 19.9)
Based on devsk's comment, I've uploaded two kernels for lucid to my
power-saving PPA:
https://launchpad.net/~brian-rogers/+archive/power
The first, 2.6.35-0unpatched+18.24~lucid, is essentially just maverick's
2.6.35-18.24 built for lucid. Note that despite the name 'unpatched', it
still has the
running powertop in maverick gives the following results:
Causas principales de despertares:
22,5% (387,2) [planificador del núcleo] Tick del balanceo de carga
22,3% (384,4) VirtualBox
9,4% (162,6) [Function call interrupts] núcleo IPI
8,6% (148,2) [tiempo de interrupción
Brian,
Installing you 2.6.35-power+18.24~lucid kernel package actually
increased the number of wakes in my case. Also, it broke brightness
adjustment for my laptop. Or am I installing the wrong kernel? I
basically added your PPA, and then did sudo apt-get install linux-
I just installed the new version of 2.6.35-power+18-generic and i saw a
performance improvement. the load balancing tick do not peak as with the
previuos version.
Top causes for wakeups:
23.6% (152.9)D chrome
25.6% (166.4) [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick
13.8% ( 89.7) [extra
I want to do a controlled test.
On lucid, I'm interested in how 2.6.35-0unpatched+18.24~lucid and
2.6.35-power+18.24~lucid compare.
On maverick, I'm interested in how 2.6.35-18.24 and 2.6.35-power+18.24 compare.
Basically, I'm investigating devsk's comment about the effect of certain
config
This because of CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG and CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS. Get rid of
these and wakeups shown in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick go
away. I just ran into by accident and compared my config with previous
version where I wasn't seeing this.
This was basically triggered by CONFIG_LATENCYTOP
I think that this bug is affecting my machine too (xps 1330m) and in few
minutes after the boot the load balancing tick spikes between 400 and
500 and everything gets unusable. it's too slow even to surf or watch a
move. i've been using ubuntu since 06.10 but untill this gets fixed i'm
enough
The patched kernel is no good for me: powertop is still showing 369
wakeups per second and my CPU runs constantly at 73 degrees when idle
(and yes, the heatsink is clean, the governor is set to powersafe and so
on).
Long story short, I have a 15 degrees difference between Windows XP and
Lucid.
Brian, I have tried the power3-generic patch and it improves some from
the nopatch kernel. The wakeups are halved but the load average of the
system is still running high. Output from powertop and top.
power3:
top - 10:22:59 up 14 min, 4 users, load average: 0.13, 0.28, 0.23
Tasks: 183 total,
FWIW, the mainline 2.6.35.2 kernel has reverted the nohz_ratelimit patch
now
(http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.35.y.git;a=commit;h=1dc89aec877583e3e42421be77b063724a4bbb07)
so Maverick should get this improvement (ie have a reduced number of
load balancing ticks).
I
Wakeups-from-idle per second : 628.5interval: 10.0s
Power usage (ACPI estimate): 28.0W (1.8 hours)
There are good chances that I will have to bin the CPU and replace it
very soon since now it overheats even during boot and randomly spikes to
80 degrees Celsius when idle. :/
--
Tens of wakes
Thanks Brian,
linux-image-2.6.35-power3-generic dropped my Wakeups from 250 per second
to 9.
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick on Core 2
Duo even with only 1 core enabled
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/524281
You received this bug notification because you
FWIW, I applied the whole bunch of
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=c4efd6b569b2646e1346a08a4c40286f8bcb5f11
to the stable 2.6.35.1 and it fixes the wake ups mostly. I still have
~20 wakeup/s from load balance tick but it's way down from ~200 on my
It's just a branch where changes to the scheduler and other related code
go before they are merged into the mainline kernel. By running a -tip
kernel, you get those changes ahead of time.
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick on Core 2
Duo even with only 1 core
Brian, thanks for the clarification. One thing I am still a little unclear on
is what the -tip
kernel is that is mentioned in the lkml thread. Does this have a different set
of patches?
--
Tens of wakes per second in [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick on Core 2
Duo even with only 1 core
I've uploaded a pair of rc6-based kernels, rc6-nopatch1 and rc6-power3.
The 'nopatch' kernel is the baseline to compare against, and rc6-power3
has the proposed revert, the same as rc5-power3. Between these two
kernels, the only difference is the proposed change.
I'd like to see some testing for
Thanks for setting these up. Sorry I haven't been able to give a better bug
report than annoying behavior so far, I should haber time to investigate
tomorrow.
For what it's worth, there's a weird thing that happens on some android
phones where the touch screen is coarsely quantized if you try to
*understand, not entertain. Damn autocomplete.
On Jul 24, 2010 1:11 AM, Brian Rogers br...@xyzw.org wrote:
I've uploaded a pair of rc6-based kernels, rc6-nopatch1 and rc6-power3.
The 'nopatch' kernel is the baseline to compare against, and rc6-power3
has the proposed revert, the same as
I tried the rc6-power3 kernel and these are the powertop numbers
Wakeups-from-idle per second : 258.3interval: 15.0s
no ACPI power usage estimate available
Top causes for wakeups:
35.2% ( 70.1) [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick
20.7% ( 41.1) [extra timer interrupt]
6.5% (
1 - 100 of 215 matches
Mail list logo
