From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: Fix the incorrect calculation about C-state idle time Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 02:39:04 +0100 Message-ID: <20100603013904.GB18755@srcf.ucam.org> References: <1275447849-25761-1-git-send-email-yakui.zhao@intel.com> <20100602150659.GA5335@srcf.ucam.org> <1275527214.3718.38.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:46576 "EHLO cavan.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932518Ab0FCBjM (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jun 2010 21:39:12 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1275527214.3718.38.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: ykzhao Cc: "lenb@kernel.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , Venkatesh Pallipadi On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 09:06:54AM +0800, ykzhao wrote: > On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 23:06 +0800, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > What kind of system was this seen on? > > This can be seen on laptops. But maybe the idle power effect is not > significant on laptops like that on server machine. > I also test the power on one T400 laptop and test shows that about > 0.3W idle power is increased. Thanks, I was able to reproduce this behaviour. Your patch appears to fix it. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org