Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-08 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 09:43:48PM +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > On Sun, 2012-08-05 at 22:36 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:08:19AM +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > > > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100,

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-08 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 09:43:48PM +0100, James Bottomley wrote: On Sun, 2012-08-05 at 22:36 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:08:19AM +0100, James Bottomley wrote: On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-07 Thread James Bottomley
On Sun, 2012-08-05 at 22:36 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:08:19AM +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley > > HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed,

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-07 Thread Ben Widawsky
On 2012-08-07 13:43, James Bottomley wrote: > On Sun, 2012-08-05 at 22:36 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:08:19AM +0100, James Bottomley wrote: >> > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: >> > > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley >>

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-07 Thread James Bottomley
On Sun, 2012-08-05 at 22:36 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:08:19AM +0100, James Bottomley wrote: On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: On Wed,

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-07 Thread Ben Widawsky
On 2012-08-07 13:43, James Bottomley wrote: On Sun, 2012-08-05 at 22:36 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:08:19AM +0100, James Bottomley wrote: On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-05 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:08:19AM +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley > HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:16 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > > On Wed, 01 Aug

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-05 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:08:19AM +0100, James Bottomley wrote: On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:16 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-02 Thread James Bottomley
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 22:08 -0700, bwidawsk wrote: > On 2012-08-01 03:06, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 10:38:36 +0100, James Bottomley > > wrote: > >> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > >> > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley > >> wrote: >

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-02 Thread Ben Widawsky
On 2012-08-02 00:20, James Bottomley wrote: > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 22:08 -0700, bwidawsk wrote: >> On 2012-08-01 03:06, Chris Wilson wrote: >> > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 10:38:36 +0100, James Bottomley >> > wrote: >> >> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: >> >> > On Wed, 01 Aug

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-02 Thread James Bottomley
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 22:08 -0700, bwidawsk wrote: On 2012-08-01 03:06, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 10:38:36 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-02 Thread Ben Widawsky
On 2012-08-02 00:20, James Bottomley wrote: On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 22:08 -0700, bwidawsk wrote: On 2012-08-01 03:06, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 10:38:36 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-02 Thread bwidawsk
On 2012-08-01 03:06, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 10:38:36 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote:

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-01 Thread bwidawsk
On 2012-08-01 03:06, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 10:38:36 +0100, James Bottomley > wrote: >> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: >> > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley >> wrote: >> > > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:16 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: >> >

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-01 Thread James Bottomley
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:16 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:06:12 +0100, James Bottomley > > HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > >

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-01 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 10:38:36 +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley > HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:16 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-01 Thread James Bottomley
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:16 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:06:12 +0100, James Bottomley > > HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > >

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-01 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 10:07:23 +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > > Can you please login to the desktop, let it idle, record > > /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/i915_cur_delayinfo and .../i915_drpc_info. > > Then trace-cmd record -e i915 sleep 10s, and follow up with a new pair > > of

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-01 Thread James Bottomley
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:16 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:06:12 +0100, James Bottomley > > HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > >

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-01 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:16 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:06:12 +0100, James Bottomley > HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > > I got the attached to apply and it doesn't really improve the idle power > > > much

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-01 Thread James Bottomley
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:16 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:06:12 +0100, James Bottomley HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > I got the attached to apply and it doesn't really improve the idle power > > much (12.5W). > > That's good to know. Next step is to try overriding

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-01 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:06:12 +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > I got the attached to apply and it doesn't really improve the idle power > much (12.5W). That's good to know. Next step is to try overriding i915.semaphores. Can you please test with i915.semaphores=0 and i915.semaphores=1? -Chris --

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-08-01 Thread James Bottomley
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 20:24 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 11:14:17 +0100, Chris Wilson chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote: > > On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:57:10 +0100, James Bottomley > HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > > > When did you inspect the debug files? One effect I can imagine is

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-01 Thread James Bottomley
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 20:24 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 11:14:17 +0100, Chris Wilson ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:57:10 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: When did you inspect the debug files? One effect I

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-01 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:06:12 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: I got the attached to apply and it doesn't really improve the idle power much (12.5W). That's good to know. Next step is to try overriding i915.semaphores. Can you please test with

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-01 Thread James Bottomley
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:16 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:06:12 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: I got the attached to apply and it doesn't really improve the idle power much (12.5W). That's good to know. Next step is to try

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-01 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:16 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:06:12 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: I got the attached to apply and it

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-01 Thread James Bottomley
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:16 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:06:12 +0100, James Bottomley

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-01 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 10:07:23 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: Can you please login to the desktop, let it idle, record /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/i915_cur_delayinfo and .../i915_drpc_info. Then trace-cmd record -e i915 sleep 10s, and follow up with a new pair

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-01 Thread James Bottomley
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:16 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:06:12 +0100, James Bottomley

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-01 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 10:38:36 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:16 +0100,

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-08-01 Thread James Bottomley
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:58 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:04 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:16 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:06:12 +0100, James Bottomley

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-31 Thread Chris Wilson
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 11:14:17 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:57:10 +0100, James Bottomley HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > > When did you inspect the debug files? One effect I can imagine is that > > > if your system was previously stuck at RPn and never upclocking the GPU

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-31 Thread James Bottomley
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 16:09 +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 07:27 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > > James Bottomley writes: > > > > > on 3.5 killing X causes idle power to go 14W -> 5.9W > > > on 3.4.6 killing X causes idle power to go 6.8W -> 5.7W > > > > That's actually

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-31 Thread Chris Wilson
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 16:09:44 +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 07:27 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > > James Bottomley writes: > > > > > on 3.5 killing X causes idle power to go 14W -> 5.9W > > > on 3.4.6 killing X causes idle power to go 6.8W -> 5.7W > > > > That's actually

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-31 Thread James Bottomley
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 07:27 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > James Bottomley writes: > > > on 3.5 killing X causes idle power to go 14W -> 5.9W > > on 3.4.6 killing X causes idle power to go 6.8W -> 5.7W > > That's actually pretty good news -- you're just not getting to RC6 > when X is running,

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-31 Thread Chris Wilson
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:57:10 +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > > When did you inspect the debug files? One effect I can imagine is that > > if your system was previously stuck at RPn and never upclocking the GPU > > when X starts. The question would then be what is preventing the GPU > > from

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-31 Thread James Bottomley
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 10:54 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:37:35 +0100, James Bottomley HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 09:28 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:06:42 +0100, James Bottomley > > HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > >

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-31 Thread Chris Wilson
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:37:35 +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 09:28 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:06:42 +0100, James Bottomley > HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > > Actually, bad news: it looks like the problem is drm: > > > > > > on 3.5 killing X

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-31 Thread James Bottomley
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 09:28 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:06:42 +0100, James Bottomley HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > Actually, bad news: it looks like the problem is drm: > > > > on 3.5 killing X causes idle power to go 14W -> 5.9W > > on 3.4.6 killing X causes idle

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-31 Thread Chris Wilson
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:06:42 +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > Actually, bad news: it looks like the problem is drm: > > on 3.5 killing X causes idle power to go 14W -> 5.9W > on 3.4.6 killing X causes idle power to go 6.8W -> 5.7W The files that will be the most interesting to compare at first

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-31 Thread James Bottomley
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 08:31 +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 11:23 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > > James Bottomley writes: > > > > > On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 09:33 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > > >> James Bottomley writes: > > >> > > >> > OK, I've run the bisect as far as I

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-31 Thread James Bottomley
On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 11:23 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > James Bottomley writes: > > > On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 09:33 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > >> James Bottomley writes: > >> > >> > OK, I've run the bisect as far as I can. It looks to be in the drm > >> > tree. Unfortunately, this tree

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-31 Thread Keith Packard
James Bottomley writes: > on 3.5 killing X causes idle power to go 14W -> 5.9W > on 3.4.6 killing X causes idle power to go 6.8W -> 5.7W That's actually pretty good news -- you're just not getting to RC6 when X is running, but RC6 is otherwise working. And, yes, the GPU really can suck that

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-07-31 Thread James Bottomley
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 08:31 +0100, James Bottomley wrote: On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 11:23 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com writes: On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 09:33 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-07-31 Thread Chris Wilson
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:06:42 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: Actually, bad news: it looks like the problem is drm: on 3.5 killing X causes idle power to go 14W - 5.9W on 3.4.6 killing X causes idle power to go 6.8W - 5.7W The files that will be the most

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-07-31 Thread James Bottomley
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 09:28 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:06:42 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: Actually, bad news: it looks like the problem is drm: on 3.5 killing X causes idle power to go 14W - 5.9W on 3.4.6 killing X causes

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-07-31 Thread James Bottomley
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 10:54 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:37:35 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 09:28 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:06:42 +0100, James Bottomley

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-07-31 Thread Chris Wilson
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:57:10 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: When did you inspect the debug files? One effect I can imagine is that if your system was previously stuck at RPn and never upclocking the GPU when X starts. The question would then be what is

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-07-31 Thread Keith Packard
James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com writes: on 3.5 killing X causes idle power to go 14W - 5.9W on 3.4.6 killing X causes idle power to go 6.8W - 5.7W That's actually pretty good news -- you're just not getting to RC6 when X is running, but RC6 is otherwise working. And, yes,

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-07-31 Thread James Bottomley
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 07:27 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com writes: on 3.5 killing X causes idle power to go 14W - 5.9W on 3.4.6 killing X causes idle power to go 6.8W - 5.7W That's actually pretty good news -- you're just not getting to

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-07-31 Thread Chris Wilson
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 16:09:44 +0100, James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote: On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 07:27 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com writes: on 3.5 killing X causes idle power to go 14W - 5.9W on 3.4.6 killing X

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-07-31 Thread James Bottomley
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 16:09 +0100, James Bottomley wrote: On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 07:27 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com writes: on 3.5 killing X causes idle power to go 14W - 5.9W on 3.4.6 killing X causes idle power to go 6.8W - 5.7W

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-30 Thread James Bottomley
On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 09:33 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > James Bottomley writes: > > > OK, I've run the bisect as far as I can. It looks to be in the drm > > tree. Unfortunately, this tree has several merge points, some of which > > go further back than v3.4. Unfortunately, once the bisect

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-30 Thread James Bottomley
On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 10:46 +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 21:25 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Sunday, July 29, 2012, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Sunday, July 29, 2012, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > On Sat, 2012-07-28 at 22:29 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-30 Thread Adam Jackson
On 7/30/12 1:05 PM, James Bottomley wrote: > Lenovo X220i > > The display device is > > 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation > 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device (rev 03) > (prog-if 00 [VGA controller]) > Subsystem: Giga-byte Technology Device

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-30 Thread Keith Packard
James Bottomley writes: > On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 09:33 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: >> James Bottomley writes: >> >> > OK, I've run the bisect as far as I can. It looks to be in the drm >> > tree. Unfortunately, this tree has several merge points, some of which >> > go further back than v3.4.

Massive power regression going 3.4->3.5

2012-07-30 Thread Keith Packard
James Bottomley writes: > OK, I've run the bisect as far as I can. It looks to be in the drm > tree. Unfortunately, this tree has several merge points, some of which > go further back than v3.4. Unfortunately, once the bisect steps back > before 3.4, we lose the changes that gave us the power

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-07-30 Thread James Bottomley
On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 10:46 +0100, James Bottomley wrote: On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 21:25 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Sunday, July 29, 2012, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Sunday, July 29, 2012, James Bottomley wrote: On Sat, 2012-07-28 at 22:29 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-07-30 Thread Keith Packard
James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com writes: OK, I've run the bisect as far as I can. It looks to be in the drm tree. Unfortunately, this tree has several merge points, some of which go further back than v3.4. Unfortunately, once the bisect steps back before 3.4, we lose

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-07-30 Thread James Bottomley
On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 09:33 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com writes: OK, I've run the bisect as far as I can. It looks to be in the drm tree. Unfortunately, this tree has several merge points, some of which go further back than v3.4.

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-07-30 Thread Keith Packard
James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com writes: On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 09:33 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: James Bottomley james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com writes: OK, I've run the bisect as far as I can. It looks to be in the drm tree. Unfortunately, this tree has

Re: Massive power regression going 3.4-3.5

2012-07-30 Thread Adam Jackson
On 7/30/12 1:05 PM, James Bottomley wrote: Lenovo X220i The display device is 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device (rev 03) (prog-if 00 [VGA controller]) Subsystem: Giga-byte Technology Device 2562