From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Willies Subject: Re: 100% C0 with 2.6.25-rc Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:56:22 +0100 Message-ID: <47BEF0A6.9000405@willies.info> References: <47BD600F.9090502@willies.info> <200802211733.54759.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from will39.synserver.de ([212.40.172.10]:45356 "EHLO will39.synserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754185AbYBVP55 (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:57:57 -0500 In-Reply-To: <200802211733.54759.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , LKML , Thomas Gleixner , Venki Pallipadi Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, 21 of February 2008, Jan Willies wrote: >> Since 2.6.25-rc1 I have a lot of wakeups/s (=E2=89=88134191,4) and s= pend 100% in C0. >> It worked fine with 2.6.24 and commandline nolapic. Without nolapic = I had 80k >> wakeups/s after some time, but not right from the start like now. =20 >=20 > We have a regression from 2.6.24, apparently interrupts-related. After a lot of bisecting I've found the bad commit:=20 9b12e18cdc1553de62d931e73443c806347cd974 is first bad commit commit 9b12e18cdc1553de62d931e73443c806347cd974 Author: venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com Date: Thu Jan 31 17:35:05 2008 -0800 ACPI: cpuidle: Support C1 idle time accounting =20 Show C1 idle time in /sysfs cpuidle interface. C1 idle time may not be entirely accurate in all cases. It includes the time spent in the interrupt handler after wakeup with "hlt" based C1. But, it = will be accurate with "mwait" based C1. Reverting the commit brings my laptop back to C2. HTH - Jan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html