Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050419 14:10]:
>>Hi!
>>
>>>The machine is a Pentium M 2.00 GHz, supporting C0-C4 processor power states.
>>>The machine run at 2.00 GHz all the time.
>>..
>>>_passing bm_history=0x (default) to processor module:_
>>>
>>>Average curr
* Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050419 14:10]:
> Hi!
>
> > The machine is a Pentium M 2.00 GHz, supporting C0-C4 processor power
> > states.
> > The machine run at 2.00 GHz all the time.
> ..
> > _passing bm_history=0x (default) to processor module:_
> >
> > Average current the last
Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 11:03:30PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
>>>"All" we need to do is to update the "diff". Without dynamic ticks, if the
>>>idle loop didn't get called each jiffy, it was a big hint that there was so
>>>much activity in between, and if there is acti
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 02:08:46PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Like "ipw2x00 looses packets" if this happens too often?
See "PCI latency error if C3 enabled" on http://ipw2100.sf.net -- it causes
network instability, frequent firmware restarts.
Dominik
-
To unsubscribe from this lis
Hi!
> > > > Because I don't consider whether there was bm_activity the last ms, I
> > > > only
> > > > consider the average, it seems to happen that I try to trigger
> > > > C3/C4 when there is just something copied and some bm active ?!?
> > >
> > > I don't think that this is perfect behaviour:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 01:57:39PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > Because I don't consider whether there was bm_activity the last ms, I only
> > > consider the average, it seems to happen that I try to trigger
> > > C3/C4 when there is just something copied and some bm active ?!?
> >
>
Hi!
> > Because I don't consider whether there was bm_activity the last ms, I only
> > consider the average, it seems to happen that I try to trigger
> > C3/C4 when there is just something copied and some bm active ?!?
>
> I don't think that this is perfect behaviour: if the system is idle, and
>
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 11:03:30PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > "All" we need to do is to update the "diff". Without dynamic ticks, if the
> > idle loop didn't get called each jiffy, it was a big hint that there was so
> > much activity in between, and if there is activity, there is most like
Hi!
> The machine is a Pentium M 2.00 GHz, supporting C0-C4 processor power states.
> The machine run at 2.00 GHz all the time.
..
> _passing bm_history=0x (default) to processor module:_
>
> Average current the last 470 seconds: *1986mA* (also measured better
> values ~1800, does battery
Reducing the CC'd people a bit ...
Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 04:56:56PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
>>If CONFIG_IDLE_HZ is set, the c-state will be evaluated on
>>three control values (averages of the last 4 measures):
>>
>>a) idle_ms -> if machine was active fo
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 04:56:56PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> If CONFIG_IDLE_HZ is set, the c-state will be evaluated on
> three control values (averages of the last 4 measures):
>
> a) idle_ms -> if machine was active for longer than this
>value (avg), the machine is assumed to not
Here are some figures (I used your pmstats):
The machine is a Pentium M 2.00 GHz, supporting C0-C4 processor power states.
The machine run at 2.00 GHz all the time.
A lot of modules (pcmcia, usb, ...) where loaded, services that could
produce load where stopped -> processor is mostly idle.
__
12 matches
Mail list logo
