On Thu, 10 May 2007 11:52:33 -0700, john stultz wrote: > On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 11:11 +0200, Mikael Pettersson wrote: > > On Tue, 8 May 2007 15:14:36 -0400, Len Brown wrote: > > > On Friday 04 May 2007 03:42, Mikael Pettersson wrote: > > > > On Thu, 03 May 2007 19:38:50 -0700, john stultz wrote: > > > > > > So that slow acpi_pm on x86_64 seems to be connected w/ the > > > > > > idle loop. > > > > > > I'm guessing the chipset halts the ACPI PM in lower C states. Do you > > > > > > have any guesses as to what might differ between x86_64 and i386 > > > > > > ACPI > > > > > > idle loops? Or might this be something different in what the BIOS > > > > > > exports in x86_64 mode or i386 mode? > > > > > > > > > > Mikael, > > > > > Just trying to dig a bit more through the acpi_processor_idle > > > > > code. > > > > > Could you run "cat /proc/acpi/processor/CPU1/power" and reply w/ the > > > > > output? > > > > > > > > Here's that file with the x86-64 kernel: > > > > > > > > active state: C2 > > > > max_cstate: C8 > > > > bus master activity: 00000000 > > > > maximum allowed latency: 20000 usec > > > > states: > > > > C1: type[C1] promotion[C2] demotion[--] > > > > latency[000] usage[00107840] duration[00000000000000000000] > > > > *C2: type[C2] promotion[--] demotion[C1] > > > > latency[010] usage[-1987043693] duration[00000000003044809185] > > > > > > it may be that the problem is C2, not C1 on this box and thus "idle=poll" > > > may be > > > overkill to workaround it. > > > > > > You can disable C2 with "processor.max_cstate=1" > > Hey Mikael, > Did booting w/ processor.max_cstate=1 have the same effect as booting > w/ idle=poll ?
It seems so. `/sbin/hwclock' and `date' are still in sync after 60 minutes, where previously `date' would lag behind by about 3 minutes. /Mikael - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
