It's the same for me. About 50% of CPU usage for kapm-idled. It's not saving energy? It's important to me because of my laptop.
Luis Miguel Garcia Borsenkow Andrej wrote: > Common myth is that system accounts its idle time to kapm-idled. > Unfotunately, it does not look like being truth. > > First, look in apm_mainloop - it has very interesting comment: > > * Ok, check all events, check for idle (and mark us > sleeping > * so as not to count towards the load average).. > > Second, start something like gkrellm and watch it for some time. Pay > attention to displayed system time and CPU temp. You'll see very > interesting results. Most of the time CPU is IDLE - i.e. it displays 0% > (or near) and CPU temp is near its minimal value (in my case it is > usually 29C). But sometimes kapm-idled decides it has something to do as > well - and system time goes up at about 50% and CPU temp *goes up* as > well - good, it does not rocket as in case of burncpu, but it stays > above minimal values. > > In both cases I do nothing except sitting there and looking at gkrellm. > which mean in both cases system is idle ... > > So the main statement is - when your kapm-idled is shown as using 50% of > your CPU - it does really use this 50% of CPU. It does *not* sit there > idling (and cooling) your CPU but really keeps it running. > > comments? > > -andrej
