From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Doug Smythies" Subject: RE: CPUs do not go idle - excessive energy consumption Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 09:36:10 -0700 Message-ID: <000401d34378$37396080$a5ac2180$@net> References: <000001d3436e$b9b58160$2d208420$@net> 2fn5expvk3OTt2fn6eOG4c Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from cmta16.telus.net ([209.171.16.89]:55626 "EHLO cmta16.telus.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752311AbdJLQgO (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Oct 2017 12:36:14 -0400 In-Reply-To: 2fn5expvk3OTt2fn6eOG4c Content-Language: en-ca Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: "'Rafael J. Wysocki'" Cc: 'Linux PM' On 2017.10.12 08:53 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Doug Smythies wrote: >> >> I am observing higher than nominal processor package power consumption, under >> some conditions. The worst case, so far, was an extra 6.3 watts or 25%, however >> more typically it is between 0 and 4 watts (over 1 minute sampling intervals). >> ...[snip]... > For starters, you can try to apply this patch > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9866841/ and see if it makes any > difference. Oh darn, I missed the importance and relevance of that e-mail (but I did get it), which might have saved me a lot of time. It sounds like it is exactly the same issue. I'll try it as soon as I can either resolve the conflicts, or go back and apply it to whatever kernel version would result in no conflicts. I'll report back once I have some test results. ... Doug