Re: Re: [PATCHES] add _CST support

Dominik Brodowski
2004-12-23T00:18:30Z

On Wed, Dec 22, 2004 at 03:37:32PM -0500, Len Brown wrote:
> I removed the D600 from the port replicator, and now
> it is able to run in C4 w/o any hacks:
Glad to hear that. Was the port replicator causing some sort of periodic bus
master activity which keeps it out of getting to C4 sleep?

> So a list of things we need comes to mind:
- wait and see if issues appear with the split-up and _CST addition
- > Enable > C1 on SMP
... this I'd like to delay a short bit until we make the idle state
algorithm a bit smarter.
- > max_cstate able to disable C4 w/o disabling C3
... see other post, suggesting max_idle_state instead
- > "nocst" flag to compare FADT method w/ _CST
- > bm_check code fix -- currently has no clue of HZ
> a 100HZ kernel gets into C4 less than
> a 1000HZ kernel, likely because of this.
... Yes, this is a bug IMHO. Also, if the idle loop hasn't been entered for one
(or two? or hundred?) ticks, I think it should re-start at C1-type sleep.
- > tick-less idle loop
- _CSD support (depends on _OSC/_PDC framework)

> ps.
> I haven't been able to reproduce the rmmod processor failure,
> though I did have a console log to show that I wasn't halucinating
> at 2AM this morning:

Hm. Did you use some cpufreq module? Will stress-test the processor module
in a few hours, after I get some sleep...

Thanks,
Dominik